Docket nos. 09-152 Argument Oral argument | Citations 562 U.S. 223 (more) End date 2011 | |
Full case name Russell Bruesewitz and Robalee Bruesewitz, Parents and Natural Guardians of Hannah Bruesewitz, A Minor Child, And In Their Own Right v. Wyeth Inc. F/K/A Wyeth Laboratories, Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, Wyeth Lederle, Wyeth Lederle Vaccines, and Lederle Laboratories Prior history Summary judgment granted to defendants, E.D. Pa.; affirmed, 561 F.3d 233 (3rd Cir. 2009); cert. granted, 559 U.S. 991 (2010) Majority Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer, Alito Similar Snyder v Phelps, Bond v United States, AT&T Mobility LLC v Co, Brown v Entertainment Merchant, Wal‑Mart Stores - Inc v Dukes | ||
Bruesewitz v wyeth llc february 2011
Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, 562 U.S. 223 (2011), deals with whether a section of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 preempts all vaccine design defect claims against vaccine manufacturers. The case has at its focus the issue of federal preemption.
Contents
Bruesewitz v wyeth inc oral argument october 12 2010
Background
Hannah Bruesewitz, the daughter of the main petitioners in the case, received Wyeth's Tri-Immunol DTP vaccine as part of childhood immunizations. The Bruesewitzes claimed that Hannah's seizures and later developmental problems came from the vaccine. They filed suit in the "Vaccine Court", a special court within the United States Court of Federal Claims. Their petition was dismissed for failure to prove a link between the vaccine and Hannah's health problems.
They proceeded to sue in Pennsylvania state court. The case was removed to the local federal court, which held that the claim was preempted by a section of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. A petition for a writ of certiorari was granted on March 8, 2010, bringing the case to the Supreme Court.
In briefings before the Court, both sides argued over the specific language of the statutory provision.
Decision
The case was decided on February 22, 2011. The Court, in a 6-2 opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia, held that the "plaintiffs design defect claims [were] expressly preempted by the Vaccine Act." Thus, the court affirmed laws that vaccine manufacturers are not liable for vaccine-induced injury or death if they are "accompanied by proper directions and warnings."
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented.