Freeman v. Hoffman-La Roche, Inc.

618 N.W.2d 827 (2000)

Free access to 20,000 Casebriefs

Legal Analysis

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

Nature Of The Case

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Facts

P went for treatment of chronic acne. After examination, her physician prescribed 20 milligrams daily of Accutane. D is the designer, manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer, fabricator, and supplier of Accutane. As a result of taking the Accutane, P claims she developed ulcerative colitis, inflammatory polyarthritis, nodular episcleritis OS, and optic nerve head drusen. P alleged that the Accutane she took was defective, misbranded, and mislabeled. She alleged that D knew that Accutane was dangerous and/or posed significant health risks and that despite this knowledge, D misled the medical community and their patients with incomplete information regarding its safety by failing to disclose the side effects that P suffered. She also alleged that D made misrepresentations regarding the safety and effectiveness of Accutane in order to induce medical providers to select Accutane instead of other available drug options. P and her physician relied upon these misrepresentations. P alleged seven theories of recovery, the details of which are set out further in the analysis sections of this opinion: (1) strict liability on the bases that D distributed Accutane when it was not fit for its intended purpose and when the inherent risks outweighed the benefits of its use, and because it was unreasonably dangerous; (2) negligence on the bases that D performed negligent and careless research, testing, design, manufacture, and inspection of the product and failed to give adequate warnings of the risks of its use; (3) misrepresentation on the basis that Hoffman falsely represented to Freeman that Accutane was safe to use, thus inducing her to use the product; (4) failure to warn; (5) breach of implied warranty; (6) breach of express warranty; and (7) fear of future product failure on the basis that the actions of D caused P to suffer mental distress and anxiety. The court dismissed P's suit, and P appealed.

Issues

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Holding & Decision

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

© 2007-2025 ABN Study Partner

© 2025 Casebriefsco.com. All Rights Reserved.