How was the market share liability theory used in Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories?
What will be an ideal response?
In one of the first DES cases, Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories, 26 Cal. 3d 588, 607 P.2d 924, cert. denied, 101 S. Ct. 285 (1980), the plaintiff was unable to identify the manufacturer responsible for making the DES taken by her mother while the plaintiff was in utero. Sympathizing with the plaintiff's plight, the court determined that because the plaintiff had sued five of the manufacturers of DES, whom she asserted produced 90 percent of the DES marketed, the burden of proof shifted to the defendants to demonstrate that they could not have supplied the DES that caused the plaintiff's injuries. Furthermore, the court reasoned that each defendant that failed to make such a showing would be held liable for the proportion of the judgment represented by its share of the DES market.
You might also like to view...
Which of the following describes the role of most state supreme courts in regulating the legal profession?
a. The justices determine the licensing requirements b. The justices determine when an attorney's license will be suspended or revoked c. The justices issue orders requiring that ethical rules become the law within the state d. All of these choices are correct
A résumé should usually be ____ in length.?
A. ?one page B. ?two pages C. ?three pages D. ?four pages
Which of the following is not a required, integral part of due process notice?
a. Date, time, and location of the hearing b. Basic facts and charges that the hearing will address c. The name and position of the specific person in charge of the hearing d. All of the above are required, integral parts of due process notice. e. None of the above is a required, integral part of due process notice.
An element in contention is an issue.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)