“Pretty bad for patients, pretty good for industry profits.”
The Supreme Court has ruled on Riegel v. Medtronic, one of several preemption cases before the Court right now. (NYT, Newsday) In the words of Allison M. Zieve, the lawyer for Donna Riegel, the decision is "pretty bad for patients, pretty good for industry profits." The Court upheld the lower courts' decisions and ruled that since the heart catheter at issue in the case had received the FDA's premarket approval, manufacturers were thus shileded from state-based lawsuits related to the catheter's safety.
From the NY Times:
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was the lone dissenter on Wednesday, asserting that the majority had adopted an unnecessary “constriction of state authority.” Justice Ginsburg said she did not believe that Congress had intended to bring about “a radical curtailment of state common-law suits seeking compensation for injuries caused by defectively designed or labeled medical devices.”
For more on federal agency preemption, also see the Federal Preemption section of the Presidential Platform for Civil Justice.
Here's some of our previous coverage of the Riegel case:
WILL MANUFACTURERS OF DEFECTIVE MEDICAL DEVICES BE GRANTED IMMUNITY FROM LAWSUITS? by Michael Townes Watson
Supreme Court to hear two “preemption” cases, by Alex Sugerman Brozan
LA Times Article on Medtronic Case Gets it Right
Kia Franklin: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 1:57 PM, Feb 20, 2008 in Federal Preemption | In the News | Preemption | Presidential Election | Supreme Court Rulings
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comments (5)