risk-utility analysis in California

2017New Hampshire design defect law relied on the risk-utility test, under which " 'a product is defective as designed if the magnitude of the danger outweighs the utility of the product.' [Citation.]" ( Bartlett , supra , 133 S.Ct. at p. 2474 .) The Supreme Court reasoned that "[i]n the drug context, either increasing the 'usefulness' of a product or reducing its 'risk of danger' would require redesigning the drug: A drug's usefulness and its risk of danger are both direct results of its chemical design and, most saliently, its active ingredients. [Citation.]" ( Id. at p. 2475.) The Court conclud

2017New Hampshire design defect law relied on the risk-utility test, under which " 'a product is defective as designed if the magnitude of the danger outweighs the utility of the product.' [Citation.]" ( Bartlett , supra , 133 S.Ct. at p. 2474 .) The Supreme Court reasoned that "[i]n the drug context, either increasing the 'usefulness' of a product or reducing its 'risk of danger' would require redesigning the drug: A drug's usefulness and its risk of danger are both direct results of its chemical design and, most saliently, its active ingredients. [Citation.]" ( Id. at p. 2475.) The Court conclud

2017The risk-utility inquiry under New Hampshire law was based on three factors: " 'the usefulness and desirability of the product to the public as a whole, whether the risk of danger could have been reduced without significantly affecting either the product's effectiveness or manufacturing cost, and the presence and efficacy of a warning to avoid an unreasonable risk of harm from hidden dangers or from foreseeable uses.' [Citations.]" ( Bartlett , supra , 133 S.Ct. at p. 2475 .) Under California's risk-benefit test, the considerations include " 'the gravity of the danger posed by the challenged d

2017The risk-utility inquiry under New Hampshire law was based on three factors: " 'the usefulness and desirability of the product to the public as a whole, whether the risk of danger could have been reduced without significantly affecting either the product's effectiveness or manufacturing cost, and the presence and efficacy of a warning to avoid an unreasonable risk of harm from hidden dangers or from foreseeable uses.' [Citations.]" ( Bartlett , supra , 133 S.Ct. at p. 2475 .) Under California's risk-benefit test, the considerations include " 'the gravity of the danger posed by the challenged d

2017Conn. 2014) 992 F.Supp.2d 68 , 88 ( Fraser ) stating that "evidence of Wyeth's marketing, advertising, and ghost-writing efforts was relevant to Plaintiffs' strict liability claim under the modified consumer expectation test." However, Fraser applied a modified consumer expectation test, which " 'incorporat[ed] risk-utility factors into the ordinary consumer expectation analysis.' " ( Id. at p. 83.) Because the jury here found in favor of defendants under the risk-benefit test, Fraser does not support plaintiff's contention.

2016(See Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano (2011) 563 U.S. 27 [ 179 L.Ed.2d 398 , 131 S.Ct. 1309, 1320 ] [regulatory agency often makes regulatory decisions based upon evidence that gives rise only to a suspicion of causation]; McClain v. Metabolife Internat., Inc. (11th Cir. 2005) 401 F.3d 1233, 1250 [public health guidelines cannot be used to establish causation because they are based upon evidence that points to a need for caution rather than proof of a causal relationship]; Rider v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp. (11th Cir. 2002) 295 F.3d 1194, 1201 [improper for medical causation expert t

2016(See Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano (2011) 563 U.S. 27 [ 179 L.Ed.2d 398 , 131 S.Ct. 1309, 1320 ] [regulatory agency often makes regulatory decisions based upon evidence that gives rise only to a suspicion of causation]; McClain v. Metabolife Internat., Inc. (11th Cir. 2005) 401 F.3d 1233, 1250 [public health guidelines cannot be used to establish causation because they are based upon evidence that points to a need for caution rather than proof of a causal relationship]; Rider v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp. (11th Cir. 2002) 295 F.3d 1194, 1201 [improper for medical causation expert t

2004(R.F. v. Abbott Laboratories, supra, 745 A.2d at p. 1180 .) “The FDA’s active involvement at every step of the test’s development, approval, and use in the field, reflected the risk-utility analysis undertaken by the FDA to address significant public policy considerations. [][] [T]he FDA’s mandate directing Abbot not to provide for retesting of samples near the cutoff . . . remained in force as part of a conscious ongoing risk-benefit analysis by the FDA in managing a public health crisis.” (Id. at p. 1192.) *933 Plaintiff here disputes the proposition that the FDA can undertake a risk-utility

2004He relies on the United States Supreme Court decisions in Food and Drug Admin, v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. (2000) 529 U.S. 120 [ 146 L.Ed.2d 121 , 120 S.Ct. 1291 ] (Brown & Williamson) and Thompson v. Western States Medical Center (2002) 535 U.S. 357 [ 152 L.Ed.2d 563 , 122 S.Ct. 1497 ] (Western States Medical Center).

2004He relies on the United States Supreme Court decisions in Food and Drug Admin, v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. (2000) 529 U.S. 120 [ 146 L.Ed.2d 121 , 120 S.Ct. 1291 ] (Brown & Williamson) and Thompson v. Western States Medical Center (2002) 535 U.S. 357 [ 152 L.Ed.2d 563 , 122 S.Ct. 1497 ] (Western States Medical Center).

2004He relies on the United States Supreme Court decisions in Food and Drug Admin, v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. (2000) 529 U.S. 120 [ 146 L.Ed.2d 121 , 120 S.Ct. 1291 ] (Brown & Williamson) and Thompson v. Western States Medical Center (2002) 535 U.S. 357 [ 152 L.Ed.2d 563 , 122 S.Ct. 1497 ] (Western States Medical Center).

2004He relies on the United States Supreme Court decisions in Food and Drug Admin, v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. (2000) 529 U.S. 120 [ 146 L.Ed.2d 121 , 120 S.Ct. 1291 ] (Brown & Williamson) and Thompson v. Western States Medical Center (2002) 535 U.S. 357 [ 152 L.Ed.2d 563 , 122 S.Ct. 1497 ] (Western States Medical Center).