Lynnbrook Farms v. Smithkline Beecham Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• considering a common law claim that the manufacturer of an animal vaccine had committed a state tort when its vaccines failed to be effective
• considering a common law claim that the manufacturer of an animal vaccine had committed a state tort when its vaccines failed to be effective
• \State tort actions can therefore be as much of a threat to national uniformity as affirmative state regulation.\
• a claim requiring a jury to make a finding contrary to APHIS’s was preempted
• failure to warn claim was preempted, because APHIS had already declared the product adequately labeled under its standards, and therefore the tort claim would result in labeling requirements distinct from those dictated by APHIS
• “This is not a case involving non-compliance. Both vaccines have met APHIS standards for safety, purity, potency, and efficacy. Thus, if Lynnbrook’s claims relate to these qualities, seeking to impose additional or different requirements in these areas, they are preempted.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).