2005 Marketing Testimonials Vaccine 
Drug & Device Law
MAY 30, 2022
The prescriber’s] testimony, however, does not establish that he would have altered his prescribing conduct. Given this testimony, the plaintiffs could not “show that stronger manufacturer warnings would have altered the physician’s prescribing conduct.” 1981) (applying Virginia law), both of which involved vaccines.
Drug & Device Law
MARCH 4, 2024
In the middle was In re Lipitor (Atorvastatin Calcium) Marketing, Sales Practices. & Plaintiffs will not be heard to argue that they “could have shored up their cases by other means had they known their expert testimony would be found inadmissible.” 49, 55 (2005). Weisgram v. Marley Co. , 440, 455-56 (2000). Fru-Con Inc. ,
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
59 
Let's personalize your content