Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, LLC

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, LLC by Mind Map: Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, LLC

1. Issue

1.1. Does the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act provide complete protection to vaccine manufacturers from allegations by alleged victims seeking damages stemming from the design flaws in vaccines brought to market.

2. Facts

2.1. Parties

2.1.1. The Bruesewitz Family

2.1.2. Wyeth, Inc. (Vaccine Manufacturer)

2.2. What Happened?

2.2.1. Daughter of Russell and Robalee Bruesewitz suffered severe health problems following a vaccine treatment for DTP.

2.2.2. Bruesewitz Family sued Wyeth, Inc. alleging that the vaccination provided to their daughter for DTP treatment was improperly designed and defected.

2.2.3. Wyeth, Inc. countered the lawsuit brought forth by the Bruesewitz Family in saying that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (hereinafter "NCVIA") safeguarded vaccine manufacturers from lawsuits stemming from allegations of "design defect." (Legal Information Institute)

2.3. Procedural History

2.3.1. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the Bruesewitz Family agreeing that all vaccine manufacturers are safeguarded from lawsuits for design defects under the NCVIA.

2.3.2. The Bruesewitz Family appealed the Third Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to the US Supreme Court.

3. Rule of Law

3.1. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act safeguards vaccine manufacturers and severely limits the scope by which the plaintiff can bring forth claims against the manufacturer for injuries sustained through the receipt of a defunct vaccination.

3.1.1. The Bruesewitz Family must prove that the injuries sustained from their daughter as a result of the vaccination were a product of improper preparation/testing and/or inaccurate and/or mislabeled warnings and instructions. (Washington Legal Foundation)

4. Application

4.1. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act provides protection to Wyeth, LLC both under the state and federal levels of jurisdiction.

4.1.1. The passage of the NCVIA is the preemptive legislation above all state tort law and precludes state tort laws from interfering within the scope of litigation against vaccine manufacturers for claims alleging design defects.

4.2. Regardless of its trial at a state or federal level, Title 42, Section 300aa-22 of the U.S. Code precludes all state tort laws and grants protection to all vaccine manufacturers from exposure to civil damages. (Legal Information Institute)

4.2.1. This preemption of all state tort laws by the NCVIA to protect all vaccine manufacturers from civil damages given that they have prescribed to all of the requirements listed under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

4.3. Without the existence of the NCVIA, there would be limited economic viability for vaccine manufacturers to remain in business and to provide the necessary vaccinations for adults and adolescents alike.

4.3.1. The NCVIA developed a "no-fault compensation program" that is adjudicated by the US Court of Federal Claims and is increasingly efficient as damages are fixed and predetermined through a Vaccine Injury Table. (Supreme Court)

4.3.1.1. Damages are rewarded through a fund that pools financial sources through an excise tax that is determined on the volume of vaccine doses consumed.

5. Conclusion

5.1. The Supreme Court upheld the Third Circuit Court of Appeals' original decision in a majority opinion.

6. Sources

6.1. Edan Shertzer and Colin O'Regan. "Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, Inc." Legal Information Institute, https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/09-152.

6.2. Daniel J. Popeo and Cory L. Andrews. "Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, Inc." Washington Legal Foundation, http://www.wlf.org/Upload/litigation/briefs/CLA-Wyeth.pdf

6.3. Supreme Court of the United States. "Bruesewitz et al. v. Wyeth LLC, FKA Wyeth, Inc., et al." https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf

6.4. Legal Information Institute. "42 U.S. Code § 300aa–22 - Standards of Responsibility." Legal Information Institute, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/300aa-22