Rudolph David Taylor v. Commonwealth of Virginia

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that plaintiff who took generic drug may not bring ordinary negligence claim against brand-name manufacturer for failure to warn.
• noting that G. L. c. 93A, § 11, business against other business claim requires commercial transaction between parties
• typically, where a consumer is injured by a product, Massachusetts law holds the manufacturer and/or seller responsible under a theory of products liability
• in deciding whether claims can survive Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, court must assume that factual allegations are true and draw “every reasonable inference in favor of” party asserting claim
• identifying four elements of claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).