O'NEILL

O'NEILL v. Novartis Consumer Health, Inc.

Good Law
147 Cal. App. 4th 1388·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 266·2007 Daily Journal DAR 2713·55 Cal. Rptr. 3d 551·2007 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2098
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 27, 2007B174512California7,075 words

Opinion

Opinion

Epstein, J.

This is an appeal from a defense verdict in two cases tried concurrently in coordinated litigation against Novartis Consumer Health, Inc., the manufacturer of pharmaceutical products containing phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Appellants claim the court erred in refusing to instruct the jury that compliance with government standards cannot be considered as a basis for assessing the safety of a product in a design defect claim. They claim the court erroneously allowed respondent to present evidence which did not meet the admissibility standards established in People v. Kelly (1976) 17 Cal.3d 24 [ 130 Cal.Rptr. 144 , 549 P.2d 1240 ] to challenge the findings of an epidemiological study on the safety of PPA. They assert the court erred in allowing Novartis to present evidence implying that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) affirmatively approved the marketing of Novartis’s PPA products while precluding appellants from utilizing contradicting evidence in their opening statement or their case in chief. They also claim error in other evidentiary rulings. We find no error and affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

We begin with background on PPA, the pharmaceutical…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.