Prescription drug design liability under the proposed restatement (third) of torts: A reporter's perspective

Rutgers Law Review

Volumn 48, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 471-

  Henderson Jr , James A ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041590823     PISSN: 00360465     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (3)

1. See RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF TORTS: PRODUCTS LIABILITY (Tentative Draft No. 2, 1995) [hereinafter RESTATEMENT (THIRD), 1995 Tentative Draft]. At the time of this writing (November, 1995), we anticipate taking Council Draft No. 3 to the Council in December, 1995.
2. Section 8 applies explicitly to prescription devices as well as drugs. Courts generally recognize this application. See, e.g., Brooks v. Medtronic, Inc., 750 F.2d 1227, 1230-32 (4th Cir. 1984) (holding the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A "prescription drug exception" applicable to cases involving cardiac pacemakers).
3. Council Draft No. 3 contains Chapters 2 and 3. Chapter 2 covers