Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Bystander claims for emotional distress (1)
- Conflict of law (1)
- Defamation (1)
- Direct liablity (1)
- Direct to consumer advertising (1)
-
- Drug manufacturers (1)
- Evaluation frameworks (1)
- FDA (1)
- Failure to warn (1)
- Federal Drug Administration (1)
- Frist Amendment (1)
- Health care (1)
- Injury and Tort Law (1)
- Learned intermediary rule (1)
- Libel by implication (1)
- Libel law (1)
- Negligent infliction of emotional distress (1)
- Perez v. Wyeth Laboratories (1)
- Prescription drugs (1)
- Public figure (1)
- Public official (1)
- Recovery of damages (1)
- Symposium (1)
- Tort law (1)
- Washington (1)
- Washington law (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Bystanders' Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress Claims In Washington State: Must You Be Present To Win?, Patrick F.X. Santel
Bystanders' Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress Claims In Washington State: Must You Be Present To Win?, Patrick F.X. Santel
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment examines the route taken by the Supreme Court of Washington to afford plaintiffs their day in court while potentially forcing certain tortfeasors to pay for plaintiffs' emotional distress claims. This Comment will also examine the framework that claimants and Washington courts need for evaluating a bystander's claims of negligent infliction of emotional distress. The framework should be free of artificial, vague, and inconsistent rules, and should allow plaintiffs to recover for negligently inflicted severe emotional distress while protecting tortfeasors from spurious claims, including claims concerning minor psychic and emotional shocks, and from liability disproportionate to culpability. Moreover, the …
(Re)Defining Public Officials And Public Figures: A Washington State Primer, Kate M. Adams
(Re)Defining Public Officials And Public Figures: A Washington State Primer, Kate M. Adams
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment reflects an attempt to distill the Supreme Court's thematic intent from over thirty years of defamation case law. The Comment then evaluates current definitions of public officials and public figures to determine whether they are consistent with the theme. Washington courts have already addressed these definitions, but this Comment posits that Washington law on public officials and public figures is inconsistent with the Supreme Court's intent and suggests alternative defining tests for public officials and public figures.
First Amendment On Trial-The Libel Lawyer's Perspective, David M. Skover
First Amendment On Trial-The Libel Lawyer's Perspective, David M. Skover
Seattle University Law Review
In several significant ways, this event is a first. It is the first symposium to be held in Seattle University School of Law since the recent dedication of our magnificent new building. It is the first symposium of its kind ever to be held in the great Northwest. Furthermore, law school and law review symposia typically focus more on free speech theory than they do on the First Amendment in practice. As the Seattle University Law Review will be transcribing and publishing an account of this event, I thought it would be interesting to do a quick electronic search for …
Direct-To-Consumer Advertising Of Prescription Drugs: After A Decade Of Speculation, Courts Consider Another Exception To The Learned Intermediary Rule, Mae Joanne Rosok
Direct-To-Consumer Advertising Of Prescription Drugs: After A Decade Of Speculation, Courts Consider Another Exception To The Learned Intermediary Rule, Mae Joanne Rosok
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment will explore whether Washington courts should recognize direct-to-consumer advertising as an exception to the learned intermediary rule. With the ultimate goal of advocating the best protection for the consumer, the discussion will suggest that Washington courts should not create an exception. A review of other exceptions to the learned intermediary rule does not support abandoning the doctrine when a drug company advertises its product directly to consumers. Nevertheless, advertising does affect consumer purchases and does influence consumer choices, and drug companies should accept the responsibility to present balanced information. This responsibility should encompass more than meeting the minimum …