Tobin v. Astra Pharmaceutical Products, Inc.

993 F.2d 528 (1993)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Tobin v. Astra Pharmaceutical Products, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
993 F.2d 528 (1993)

Facts

When Kathy Tobin (plaintiff), who was pregnant with twins, was hospitalized for preterm labor, she was prescribed ritodrine to prevent further preterm labor. Tobin, who had a heart murmur, had previously been hospitalized during her pregnancy for a viral condition. While on the ritodrine, Tobin developed tachypnea, dyspnea, and a gallop heart rhythm. After giving birth, Tobin suffered congestive heart failure and required a heart transplant. Tobin sued the manufacturer of ritodrine and its United States distributor, Astra Pharmaceutical (defendant), in a products-liability suit alleging claims for design defect and failure-to-warn of the conditions that led to Tobin’s heart transplant. After finding Astra liable on both claims, a jury awarded Tobin almost $4.5 million. The district court denied Astra’s motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or a new trial, and Astra appealed. Tobin argued that under Kentucky’s risk-utility analysis, the only way to decide whether a drug is defective and unreasonably dangerous is to ask whether an ordinarily prudent manufacturer, being fully aware of the risks, would put the drug on the market. To that end, Tobin further argued that ritodrine had no benefits regarding improving neonatal outcomes and weighed against the serious risks of the drug and what Tobin suffered, the risks outweigh the benefits such that no ordinary prudent manufacturer would have placed ritodrine on the market, notwithstanding Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval that Tobin asserted was based on insufficient and invalid data. Astra first argued that allowing Tobin to litigate the drug’s efficacy in a state-law tort action “is a mockery of the scientific analysis employed by the FDA and the Advisory Committee which conclusively found that ritodrine was efficacious.” Astra also argued that because ritodrine is effective in prolonging pregnancy, it improves neonatal outcome, and the risks to maternal and fetal health are outweighed by the benefits of reducing neonatal morbidity and mortality.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Guy, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership