Supreme Court Delivers Devastating Blow to U.S. Consumers with Generic Ruling

The Supreme Court delivered a crippling blow to the American consumer with its decision in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. v. Bartlett. The Justices have again shown their allegiance to the large pharmaceutical corporations, deciding that federal law preempts defect design claims for generic drug manufacturers. In the Bartlett case, a legal battle has been ongoing whether generic drug manufacturers can be held responsible for injuries caused by the use of their product. Because the composition and warning labels of generic drugs are required to be identical to those of their name brand counterparts, generic drug manufacturers, in the past, were granted immunity to civil action resulting from the use of their drugs. The plaintiff in the original case and the respondent to Mutual’s petition, Karen Bartlett, was given a prescription for Clinoril, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). Her pharmacist gave her the generic version, sundilac. Ms. Bartlett suffered from toxic epidermal necrolysis, a rare, life threatening skin condition. The condition left Ms. Bartlett disfigured, disabled and nearly blind. At the time Ms. Bartlett took the drug, its label did not carry a warning for toxic epidermal necrolysis and the lower courts decided with her. A jury awarded Ms. Bartlett $21 million for her pain and suffering caused by the wrong-doing of Mutual, a decision which now has been reversed by the Supreme Court’s ruling. The ruling of the Supreme Court essentially effaces the generic drug companies of all liability by protecting them from litigation from defective drug designs. Residual effects of the decision will be felt across many areas of the law and leave the injured American consumer with no means of recourse. In the case of Pliva, Inc. v. Mensing, in 2011, the Supreme Court determined that federal law protects generic drug manufacturers from facing litigation over injuries suffered by patients as a result of misinformation on the drug label. The Court held that because the generic drug manufacturer must distribute the same warning label as the brand name manufacturer, it cannot be held responsible for failing to warn patients of associated risks with its product. If you or someone you love was injured after taking a dangerous and defective drug, it is important to contact an experienced dangerous drug lawsuit attorney immediately. The Phillips Law Firm can assist you with all of your legal needs. Our caring and professional national dangerous drug lawsuit attorneys will provide you with a free case evaluation and help you determine your rights to compensation for your injuries. Call us at 1-800-708-6000 today to schedule your appointment.