Proximate Cause. Intervening Causes. Foreseeable Failure to Avoid Danger

1921 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 92
Keyword(s):  
Proximate Cause

scholarly journals Erratum to: The proximate cause of asynchronous hatching in the burying beetle Nicrophorus quadripunctatus

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-195
Author(s):  
Mamoru Takata ◽  
Shinya Hayashi ◽  
Cathleen E. Thomas ◽  
Satoshi Koyama
Keyword(s):  
Burying Beetle ◽  
Proximate Cause ◽  
Asynchronous Hatching

Rationale of Proximate Cause

1928 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 235
Author(s):  
A. H. T. ◽  
Leon Green
Keyword(s):  
Proximate Cause

Superoxide is not the proximate cause of paraquat toxicity

Redox Report ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. D. Scott ◽  
J. W. Eaton
Keyword(s):  
Proximate Cause ◽  
Paraquat Toxicity

Torts. Proximate Cause. Intervening Wrongful Acts

1916 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 153
Keyword(s):  
Proximate Cause

Damages for Fright and the Proof of Proximate Cause

1919 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 407
Author(s):  
A. J. L.
Keyword(s):  
Proximate Cause

scholarly journals Pharmaceutical Phonies: The Entanglement of Fraud, Third-Party Payors, and Proximate Cause in Civil RICO Cases

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Merrick Max Dillard Hayashi
Keyword(s):  
Health Risks ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Related Case ◽  
Proximate Cause ◽  
Drug Companies ◽  
District Council ◽  
Health Care Fund

This Case Note analyzes the Ninth Circuit’s approach to the issue of whether patients and doctors destroy proximate cause in cases where third-party payors (“TPPs”) sue drug companies for fraudulently misrepresenting the health risks associated with their products. In the 2019 case Painters & Allied Trades District Council 82 Health Care Fund v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals Co., the Ninth Circuit held that TPPs suing to recover damages from a pharmaceutical company for the fraudulent omission of a drug’s health risks could satisfy the proximate cause requirement for a civil cause of action under § 1964(c) of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”). The Ninth Circuit’s decision is satisfactory in that it faithfully (1) observes the Supreme Court’s direct relation test and (2) follows precedent establishing that a plaintiff satisfies the proximate cause requirement when their alleged injury is a foreseeable and natural consequence of the defendant’s fraud. As a matter of public policy, this holding is positive because it hamstrings pharmaceutical companies’ ability to escape liability by hiding behind patients, doctors, and other actors inhabiting the chain of causation. Additionally, the Ninth Circuit’s holding is positive in that it adheres to Supreme Court precedent and helps deter future injurious conduct. In support of these assertions, this Case Note begins by examining the factual background and procedural posture of Painters. The Note continues by analyzing the majority’s opinion with respect to related case law and closes by suggesting ways to address some of the potential problems that could stem from the Ninth Circuit’s decision.

scholarly journals Proximate Cause Explained: An Essay in Experimental Jurisprudence

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Knobe ◽  
Scott J. Shapiro
Keyword(s):  
Proximate Cause
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document