Practice Area: Defective and dangerous products
Outcome: Reversal of Summary Judgment Dismissal
Description: Plaintiff was exposed to DES (diethystilbestrol) in utero. The DES exposure caused physical abnormalities which made pregnancy difficult. The plaintiffs sued the drug manufacturers, claming that they should have warned prescribing doctors of the possibility of side effects of DES. The plaintiff's mother's doctor testified that he thought that DES was helpful and safe. The defense claimed that this testimimony meant that any warnings would not have caused this doctor not to prescribe DES; therefore, failure to warn did not cause the plaintiff's injuries. The trial court dismissed the case. The court of appeals reversed. It held that the treating doctor was never asked if he would have prescribed DES if he had been informed of studies showing its ineffectiveness and danger. The court reversed the dismissal and remanded the case for trial.