Ackermann v. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals’s Empirical Analysis
526 F.3d 203 · 2008
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently December 2020 · most notably Gagnon v. United Technisource, Inc. (2010), Walton v. Bayer Corp. (2011)
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Skotak v. Tenneco Resins, Inc. · Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co. v. Martinez · Alm v. Aluminum Co. of America · Union Pump Co. v. Allbritton
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under the doctrine, a patient-purchaser’s doctor stands between the patient and the manufacturer, professionally evaluating the patient’s needs, assessing the risks and benefits of available drags, prescribing one, and supervising its use____ If the doctor is properly warned of the possibility of a side effect and is advised of the symptoms normally accompanying the side effect, it is anticipated that injury to the patient will be avoided. Accordingly, the doctrine excuses a drug manufacturer “from warning each patient who receives the product when the manufacturer properly warns the prescribing physician of the product’s dangers.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“When the learned intermediary doctrine is asserted in a cause of action, it is used to show to whom a defendant, usually a prescription drug manufacturer, owes the duty to adequately warn. It is not used to show that the plaintiff has no valid case. Even when the learned intermediary doctrine applies, the manufacturer still has a duty to warn, and it can still be held liable directly to the plaintiff if the warning that it gave is inadequate.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“However, if a warning specifically mentions the circumstances complained of, then the warning is adequate as a matter of law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.