Tripping Up Defendants With Bootstrap Reasoning

Law360, New York (June 6, 2012, 1:14 PM EDT) -- Bartlett v. Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. Inc., a Stevens-Johnson/toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN) generic drug case that produced a $21 million judgment upheld on appeal, gave us writer's block.

Upon first reading of the opinion, we thought Bartlett told the following story:

New Hampshire has adopted the controversial third aspect of the risk/utility doctrine so that plaintiff needed only to prove that the risk posed by the drug — sulindac, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) — outweighed its utility; it's often prescribed for the sort of shoulder pain suffered...
To view the full article, register now.