This is how it should go – exactly like this. It’s about time courts upheld some sense in their rulings and forced people to realize that sometimes life happens and you don’t always get paid.
finally someone agrees, that the user of the drug needs to be held responsible. sorry that it cost him his life, but if told not to take it, why put yourself in the position to begin with.
again, we go back to the old saying: if you have money, i am going to get it — HAHA, last laugh was from lilly. people need to remember they are responsible for their own actions.
This is a classic case of someone trying to pick another’s pockets because they couldn’t get blood from a stone! I’ll bet that woman is really ticked at her attorney for believing that Lilly could be held vicariously responsible for a private citizen’s tort.
They probably declined to get life insurance and they figured that someone else should pay for their errors. O well seems like peoples eyes are opening up now
The question I have, is why didn’t the drug manufacturer have a duty to print the side affects of their drug. Crew’s would have known and then maybe have not driven or better yet, the drug company would have a leg to stand on because they would have informed their consumer. I’m with the rest of you about suing, but it seemed like an innocent person died and the drug company walked away with no punishment for keeping their drug’s side affects a secret. I hope the rest of you don’t have a prescription drug you’re taking that the drug companies are hiding an important side affect from you. Remember if you die from it or your child does, don’t sue.
I take prescription drugs for Type II diabetes and have regular checks by physician. My pharmacist prints warning labels on all my prescriptions,prints information, tells me if something has changed as well as my Dr.
When you watch these wonderful(haha) pharmaceutical commercials, they are now listing many of the warnings and advising to consult your Dr.for further ????
Woman who started the accident had evidently not followed her dr’s orders so she is the one that needed suing.
I’m diabetic. In 1993, the laws changed to FINALLY allow me not to have to get a doctors note to allow me to keep my license. I know what I am & am not supposed to do with my medications. Doctors STRICTLY explain all aspects of diabetes to new patients. I used to “pretend” I wasn’t diabetic, but driving is a privilege, not a right, and I was always careful. This lawsuit puts my privilege in jeopardy and I’m so glad the courts found in favor of Eli Lilly!
“The “learned intermediary” doctrine adopted by Maryland courts “imposes on a manufacturer of prescription drugs or devices a duty to give adequate warnings to physicians, dentists, and other licensed health care professionals, including nurses, who may prescribe these products. Under the doctrine, a manufacturer which has adequately warned the physician, in almost every circumstance, has no duty to warn a patient,”
I believe that the drug manufacturer does have a duty to warn the consumers of their drugs as well as their physicians. I know that I was prescribed a drug that had severe side effects that my physician did not make known to me…as many drugs have a very LONG list of side effects. I actually thought that they did have this duty and that is why they provide the pamphlet in 4 point type…which I now read!!
As the article states the warning being litigated was a warning to the person who died – who was not the diabetic using Eli Lilly’s drug. For some reason this person’s estate thought everyone should know there are people on the road who might be taking medication that may at some time cause them to not be the best drivers in the world and when combined with various other conditions (medical, physical, chemical, weather, etc) these medications may have a chance at being a factor in a traffic accident. Obviously this is stupid.
This is how it should go – exactly like this. It’s about time courts upheld some sense in their rulings and forced people to realize that sometimes life happens and you don’t always get paid.
finally someone agrees, that the user of the drug needs to be held responsible. sorry that it cost him his life, but if told not to take it, why put yourself in the position to begin with.
again, we go back to the old saying: if you have money, i am going to get it — HAHA, last laugh was from lilly. people need to remember they are responsible for their own actions.
This is a classic case of someone trying to pick another’s pockets because they couldn’t get blood from a stone! I’ll bet that woman is really ticked at her attorney for believing that Lilly could be held vicariously responsible for a private citizen’s tort.
They probably declined to get life insurance and they figured that someone else should pay for their errors. O well seems like peoples eyes are opening up now
How about this one, the estate can sue their lawyer. He should have been honest and informed them that there was no case.
So they should file suit aginst her blood sucking attorney for failure to properly represent
Hows that for a good up take on this article?
The question I have, is why didn’t the drug manufacturer have a duty to print the side affects of their drug. Crew’s would have known and then maybe have not driven or better yet, the drug company would have a leg to stand on because they would have informed their consumer. I’m with the rest of you about suing, but it seemed like an innocent person died and the drug company walked away with no punishment for keeping their drug’s side affects a secret. I hope the rest of you don’t have a prescription drug you’re taking that the drug companies are hiding an important side affect from you. Remember if you die from it or your child does, don’t sue.
I take prescription drugs for Type II diabetes and have regular checks by physician. My pharmacist prints warning labels on all my prescriptions,prints information, tells me if something has changed as well as my Dr.
When you watch these wonderful(haha) pharmaceutical commercials, they are now listing many of the warnings and advising to consult your Dr.for further ????
Woman who started the accident had evidently not followed her dr’s orders so she is the one that needed suing.
There is such a thing as being responsible
I’m diabetic. In 1993, the laws changed to FINALLY allow me not to have to get a doctors note to allow me to keep my license. I know what I am & am not supposed to do with my medications. Doctors STRICTLY explain all aspects of diabetes to new patients. I used to “pretend” I wasn’t diabetic, but driving is a privilege, not a right, and I was always careful. This lawsuit puts my privilege in jeopardy and I’m so glad the courts found in favor of Eli Lilly!
“The “learned intermediary” doctrine adopted by Maryland courts “imposes on a manufacturer of prescription drugs or devices a duty to give adequate warnings to physicians, dentists, and other licensed health care professionals, including nurses, who may prescribe these products. Under the doctrine, a manufacturer which has adequately warned the physician, in almost every circumstance, has no duty to warn a patient,”
I believe that the drug manufacturer does have a duty to warn the consumers of their drugs as well as their physicians. I know that I was prescribed a drug that had severe side effects that my physician did not make known to me…as many drugs have a very LONG list of side effects. I actually thought that they did have this duty and that is why they provide the pamphlet in 4 point type…which I now read!!
As the article states the warning being litigated was a warning to the person who died – who was not the diabetic using Eli Lilly’s drug. For some reason this person’s estate thought everyone should know there are people on the road who might be taking medication that may at some time cause them to not be the best drivers in the world and when combined with various other conditions (medical, physical, chemical, weather, etc) these medications may have a chance at being a factor in a traffic accident. Obviously this is stupid.