Krasnopolsky v. Warner-Lambert Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that any alleged inadequacy of the manufacturer's warning was not, as a matter of law, the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries where the physician testified he would have prescribed the drug even if the warnings had been different
• granting manufacturer's motion for summary judgment where treating medical care provider testified that he would have followed the same course of treatment had the warnings been different
• granting summary judgment and finding that \speculative and conclusory claims of possible inadequacies in the warning without any evidentiary backup does not create a genuine factual issue so as to preclude summary judgment\
• “Notably, the [plaintiffs] have failed to submit any type of expert proof, in an affidavit or otherwise, which would establish any causation between [plaintiff’s] injury and the alleged negligence of [defendant].”
• where FDA ordered labeling change, Rule 407 was inapplicable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).