These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10101679)
21. Medical device preemption after Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr. Neraas MB Food Drug Law J; 1996; 51(4):619-29. PubMed ID: 11797731 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Medical devices; preemption of state product liability claims--FDA. Proposed rule. Fed Regist; 1997 Dec; 62(239):65384-8. PubMed ID: 10176832 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Legal overprotection. Friedman JH Med Health R I; 2004 Oct; 87(10):294. PubMed ID: 15559378 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Medical devices; preemption of state product liability claims--FDA. Correction. Fed Regist; 1997 Dec; 62(242):66179. PubMed ID: 10179302 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Breast implants, Hippocrates, and burden of proof. McGivney WT Physician Exec; 1992; 18(2):54-5. PubMed ID: 10171041 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Civil and criminal liability associated with food recalls. Packman JM Food Drug Law J; 1998; 53(3):437-52. PubMed ID: 10346721 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Pharmaceutical industry wins "round one" in protections against product liability claims. Gatty B Hosp Formul; 1995 Apr; 30(4):238, 237. PubMed ID: 10141868 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Grandfathering can seriously damage your wealth: due diligence in mergers and acquisitions of medical device companies. Brown WM Spec Law Dig Health Care Law; 2002 Nov; (283):9-42. PubMed ID: 12506606 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Liability concerns about implanted material may hurt device availability. Scott L Mod Healthc; 1993 Jun; 23(26):90. PubMed ID: 10171460 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Product liability implications of biomaterials in the United States. Price JM Clin Mater; 1994; 16(4):223-7. PubMed ID: 10184317 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Epidemiology as more than statistics: a revised tool for products liability. Berlin RJ Tort Trial Insur Pract Law J; 2006; 42(1):81-103. PubMed ID: 17486721 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Rewarding regulatory compliance: the pursuit of symmetry in products liability. Noah L Georgetown Law J; 2000 Jul; 88(7):2147-65. PubMed ID: 11503661 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Regulatory compliance preclusion of tort liability: limiting the dual-track system. Stewart RB Georgetown Law J; 2000 Jul; 88(7):2167-86. PubMed ID: 11503662 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Vicarious liability. Hannah HW J Am Vet Med Assoc; 1995 Oct; 207(7):863-4. PubMed ID: 7559005 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Reassessing the law of preemption. Dinh VD Georgetown Law J; 2000 Jul; 88(7):2085-118. PubMed ID: 11503659 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Legally speaking. Who's to blame for faulty equipment? Tammelleo AD RN; 1990 Oct; 53(10):67-72. PubMed ID: 2218328 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Medtronic v. Lohr: for want of a word, the patient was almost lost--fixing the mischief caused in Cipollone by dividing the preemption stream. Darrow Kleinhaus S Food Drug Law J; 1998; 53(2):297-320. PubMed ID: 10346686 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. "Safe" biomaterials. Black J J Biomed Mater Res; 1995 Jul; 29(7):791-2. PubMed ID: 7593016 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. License to maim: federal pre-emption and the Medical Device Amendments of 1976. Petrella ME Health Matrix Clevel; 1996; 6(2):349-89. PubMed ID: 10178392 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]