Rodriguez

Petitioners (plaintiffs) 1 ask us to determine that the holding of the Supreme Court in Brown v. Superior Court (1988) 44 Cal.3d *1373 1049 [ 245 Cal.Rptr. 412 , 751 P.2d 470 ], abolishing strict liability for the manufacture of a prescription drug, should not be extended to cases of certain nonprescription medications. We will conclude such a consideration is premature. Plaintiff properly pled a cause of action for strict products liability and the trial court erroneously granted the motion for judgment on the pleadings of real party in interest (defendant).

The Case and the Facts

Andy Rodriguez, a minor, and Nancy Rodriguez, individually and as the minor’s guardian ad litem, are plaintiffs in an action pending in the superior court against several health care providers and defendant, a manufacturer of baby aspirin. The complaint alleges plaintiffs suffered damages when Andy ingested baby aspirin, causing Reyes Syndrome and leaving him severely and permanently injured. The complaint seeks recovery from defendant based in part on a theory of manufacturer’s strict liability. The portion of the complaint relevant to our discussion of that theory reads: “On or about. . .…

We recognize the problems of practical application for the trial courts created by a cause of action for strict liability based upon a failure to warn of a reasonably foreseeable risk. However, the problem lies not with this court’s opinion, but with Brown v. Superior Court (1988) 44 Cal.3d 1049 [ 245 Cal.Rptr. 412 , 751 P.2d 470 ] and Finn v. G. D. Searle & Co. (1984) 35 Cal.3d 691 [ 200 Cal.Rptr. 870 , 677 P.2d 1147 ], by which we are bound.

Best, Acting P. J., concurred.

A petition for a rehearing was denied August 1, 1990, and the petition of real party in interest for review by the Supreme Court was denied September 19, 1990.