Rivera v. Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that when drug could and did perform adequately in its ordinary function for plaintiffs, plaintiffs’ breach of the implied warranty of merchantability claim seeking only benefit-of-the-bargain damages did not plead an injury in fact
• holding recasting products liability claim in language of contract law does not create an injury
• holding that when drug could and did perform adequately in its ordinary function for plaintiffs, plaintiffs = breach of the implied warranty of merchantability claim seeking only benefit-of-the-bargain damages did not plead an injury in fact
• holding recasting products liability claim in language of contract law does not create an injury
• holding recasting products liability claim in language of contract law does not create an injury
• “Duract worked. Had Wyeth provided additional warnings or made Duract safer, the plaintiffs would be in the same position they occupy now. Accordingly, they cannot have a legally protected contract interest.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).