Wood v. Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, Division of American Home Products

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that physical injury is required, even with a physical impact, in cases involving exposure to toxic substances
• relying on Metro-North in rejecting \monitoring funds” and noting that allowing the claims would \impair [the defendant's] ability to fully compensate victims who emerge years later with actual injuries that require immediate attention”
• “Because [the plaintiff] has shown no present physical injury, her cause[s] of action under theories of negligence and strict liability have yet to accrue.”
• “Just as a negligence claim must be supported by a resulting physical injury, so must a claim based on strict liability.”
• further stating that “[w]here there has been a physical injury requiring future medical treatment, medical monitoring damages may be a novel way of describing a remedy already employed in this jurisdiction”
• “‘The words ‘physical harm’ are used to denote physical impairment of the human body, or of tangible property’ . . . [the plaintiff’s] body has not yet been impaired by her ingestion” of the contaminant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).