Liability

Front 1

What are the elements of negligence (4)

Back 1

1.) Duty
2.) Breach of duty
3.) Causation
4.) Injury

Front 2

Duty
a.) what is it based on?
b.) liability formula

Back 2

a.) the relationship between individuals
b.) B < PL (burden of precautions < probability of accident occurring x gravity of injury)

Front 3

Breach of duty
a.) how is this measured?

Back 3

a.) you measure the legal standard of care by what a REASONABLE and PRUDENT pharmacist would do

Front 4

Causation
a.) what is it?

Back 4

a.) a cause to action due to injury. If there is no injury, no causation

Front 5

Injury
a.) where does it come from?
b.) types of causes

Back 5

a.) a breach of duty
b.) cause in fact, proximate cause

Front 6

The learned intermediary doctrine

Back 6

States that drug companies need to provide adequate warnings to physicians, the learned intermediaries. Pharmacists are not included, thus do not need to give warnings on adverse effects

Front 7

Types of expert testimony (2)

Back 7

1.) Frye test
2.) federal rule

Front 8

Frye test
a.) type of
b.) what

Back 8

a.) expert testimony
b.) scientific evidence can be admissible if it is generally accepted by the scientific community

Front 9

Federal rule
a.) type of
b.) what

Back 9

a.) expert testimony
b.) an expert witness is needed to explain a fact, which is used to better understand the evidence or issue

Front 10

When do courts recognize a duty to warn? (3)

Back 10

1.) expert witness says there is a breach of duty
2.) voluntary undertaking (baker v arbor drug)
3.) special knowledge

Front 11

DeCordova v. State of Colorado

Back 11

Not all errors are negligent. Errors happen because of the statistics of probability. Hard to tell if negligent or not

Front 12

Harco v Holloway

Back 12

Tamoxifen vs Tambocor. Misfill. Incidence reports

Front 13

Baker v. Arbor Drugs

Back 13

Arbor drugs has a DUR system. Pharmacy voluntary assumed duty. This trumps the learned intermediary doctrine because you voluntarily assumed duty

Front 14

Kasin v. Osco Drugs

Back 14

Renal failure from Daypro. Sued RPh for failure to warn. Argued giving out med sheet = voluntary assumption of duty. However, this undermines the learned intermediary doctrine. It is primarily the physician that should warn

Front 15

Happel v. Wal-Mart

Back 15

NSAID allergy, pt got sick. Even though pharmacist had no duty to warn, he KNEW the contraindication and KNEW the risk, thus had duty to warn.

Front 16

DiGiovanni v. Osco

Back 16

Lithium + Tenoretic. Needed lithium monitoring bc of drug interaction. RPh told MD, MD said fill it anyways, he will monitor. Next refill, new RPh doesn't call MD of drug interaction. Pt. dies. RPh was safe under learned intermediary action and this was different from the Happel v. Wal-Mart case.