Skip to Main Content
Wexler Boley & Elgersma LLP
  • Our Firm
    • Who We Serve
      • Shareholders
      • Whistleblowers
      • Consumers
      • Businesses
      • Government Entities
    • Our Professionals
    • Working with Wexler Boley & Elgersma LLP
    • Locations
    • News
    • Careers
    • Report Your Concern
    • Testimonials
  • Practice Areas
    • Antitrust Litigation
    • Business & Commercial Litigation
    • Securities & Corporate Governance
    • Healthcare Litigation
    • Consumer Protection
    • Whistle Blower False Claims Litigation
    • Government Representation
    • Employment Litigation
  • Cases
    • Antitrust Litigation Cases
    • Business & Commercial Litigation Cases
    • Consumer Protection Cases
    • Employment Litigation Cases
    • Government Representation Cases
    • Healthcare Litigation Cases
    • Mass Tort Litigation Cases
    • Securities & Corporate Governance Cases
    • Whistle Blower False Claims Cases
  • Investigations
    • Similac Toxic Infant Formula Lawsuit
    • Kid’s Castle Biometric Privacy Lawsuit
    • Contaminated Baby Food Lawsuit
    • Fatal Sportmix Pet Food Recall Class Action Lawsuit
    • Claire’s Data Breach Lawsuit
    • Insurance Denial for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Treatment
    • Perpetual Sales Litigation
    • Railroad Price-Fixing Lawsuit
    • Medicare Advantage Fraud Litigation
    • Biometric Fingerprinting Litigation
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
See all blog posts
4.17.2012

A Call to Restore the Rights of Generic Drug Consumers

By Bethany Turke, Associate
You Should Know, For Consumers

Warning labels on generic drugs have garnered a lot of attention recently, and for good reason.  In PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, 131 S. Ct. 2567 (2011), the Supreme Court held that federal drug regulations applicable to generic drug manufacturers, which require that generic drug manufacturers use safety labels identical to those used by the brand name drug manufacturers, pre-empt state law failure-to-warn claims.[1]  The state tort laws at issue “require a drug manufacturer that is or should be aware of its product’s danger to label that product in a way that renders it reasonably safe.”[2]  In finding that the state tort law claims were pre-empted by federal law, the Court reasoned that it was impossible for the generic drug manufacturers to comply with both the state tort laws and regulations promulgated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), as the federal regulations prevent the generic drug manufacturers from independently changing their safety labels even if they learn of risks not included on those labels.[3]

Among other “absurd consequences,” the dissent in Mensing emphasized that the decision would “strip[ ] generic-drug consumers of compensation when they are injured by inadequate warnings.”[4]  Indeed, although consumers can maintain failure-to-warn claims against brand name drug manufacturers, which are governed by different federal statutes and regulations, courts across the country have cited Mensing when dismissing injured consumers’ lawsuits against generic drug companies.

Mensing has stark implications for consumer safety.  The vast majority of prescriptions filled in the United States each year are filled with generic drugs.  As time passes and generic competition increases, brand name manufacturers have less incentive to monitor the adequacy of their safety labeling, even though significant drug-related risks are often discovered only when drugs are used by a broader population following initial FDA approval.  Thus, preventing failure-to-warn lawsuits against generic drug manufacturers deprives the consuming public of an effective way of incentivizing the manufacturers to ensure that safety risks are fully disclosed.

There is, thankfully, mounting pressure to undo the effects of the Mensing decision.  In August 2011, Public Citizen filed a Citizen Petition (the “Citizen Petition”) requesting, in part, that the FDA authorize generic drug manufacturers to revise generic drug labeling through certain procedures that the FDA currently interprets as applying only to brand name manufacturers. Early last month, the American Association for Justice submitted comments in support of the Citizen Petition.  And, on March 26, 2012, Senator Leahy announced plans to introduce legislation “that permits generic manufacturers to improve the warning information for their products in the same way as brand manufacturers, providing adequate warnings to consumers.

At the conclusion of the Court’s opinion in Mensing, Justice Thomas reminded the reader:  “As always, Congress and the FDA retain the authority to change the law and regulations if they so desire.”[5]  Let’s hope that one of those entities seizes the opportunity to remedy this dangerous and unjust result.

———————————————————————————————————
Photo Credit: Ano Lobb 
Sources:

[1] PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, 131 S. Ct. 2567, 2572-82 (2011).

[2] Id. at 2573.

[3] Id. at 2577-82.

[4] Id. at 2592 (Sotomayor, J., dissenting).

[5] Mensing, 131 S. Ct. at 2582.

 

Share

No Comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Receive News Updates

Get the latest from Wexler Wallace LLP & stay informed.

Categories

  • Media Appearances
  • Uncategorized
  • Columns
    • Guest Post
    • Ken Wexler
    • Ed Wallace
  • Practice Areas
    • Consumer Protection
    • Mass Tort Litigation
    • Business & Commercial Litigation
    • Healthcare Litigation
    • Employment Litigation
  • Cases
  • Hall Of Shame
    • Villain Of The Week
  • In The News
    • Public Victories
  • Featured Investigations
  • The Firm
    • News releases
    • Around The World
    • Our Professionals
    • Chicago
  • You Should Know
    • For Investors
    • For Businesses
    • For Consumers
  • Featured Cases
  • awards
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
Image

311 S. Wacker Drive,
Suite 5450
Chicago, IL 60606
P_312.346.2222
F_312.346.0022

  • Our Firm
  • Practice Areas
  • Cases
  • Investigations
  • Newsroom
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Sitemap
  • Privacy Statement
  • Legal Disclaimer

2022 © Wexler Boley & Elgersma LLP