This article surveys three recent developments. In the Mason v. Smithklinebeecham Corp. case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit wrestles with the question whether a warnings claim regarding the prescription antidepressant drug Paxil is preempted. Although much of the preemption citadel was broken by a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year, a portion was left standing. Mason examines what’s left of the preemption defense.
In the Appellate Division’s Thompson v. Mather decision, the court confronts the interesting question whether a nonparty deponent’s counsel can object or participate at the deposition. The answer may surprise you. And, in the Appellate Division’s Shectman v. Wilson decision we see that there may be limits to the common notion that a “doctor is a doctor” when a physician testifies on medical subjects outside of his or her specialty.
Preemption Rejected
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
