Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Sebok on Wyeth v. Levine

In this week's FindLaw column, Anthony Sebok and Benjamin Zipursky discuss the facts of Wyeth v. Levine and urge the Supreme Court to "decide Levine quite narrowly (however it decides) and we are cautiously optimistic that it will do so."

Among other things, Sebok and Zipursky say that:

"The problem with Levine is that the jury and the judges in Vermont handed Wyeth a loss it clearly did not deserve, because they stretched tort law to its limit (and perhaps beyond) to respond to the gripping facts before them. For any number of basic reasons, the result in Levine is pathological as a matter of products liability law."

Hat tip to Torts Prof.

1 comment:

hg said...

Sebok and Sipusky conclude:

"we are inclined to think that as a matter of federalism doctrine, the U.S. Supreme Court ought to leave the state court's understanding intact. But we leave to our next column in this series the exploration of that issue, and of the substantive merits of the preemption arguments themselves."

We can look forward to that.