FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 360:2257-2258 May 21, 2009 Number 21 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear Related Article by Kesselheim, A. S. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: In their Perspective article about the Supreme Court, preemption, and malpractice liability (Feb. 5 issue),¹ Kesselheim and Studdert suggest that preemption will not result in more malpractice claims against physicians for failure to warn, which they say are uncommon and financially unattractive to plaintiff's attorneys. I hope they are correct but have yet to find a plaintiff's attorney who agrees with them.

In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Riegel v. Medtronic² that a product-liability lawsuit brought against Medtronic in a state court was preempted because the device (an angioplasty catheter) had received marketing approval from . . . [Full Text of this Article]

HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org Comments and questions? Please contact us. The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.