From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Parke, Davis Company v. Mayes

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jul 9, 1971
124 Ga. App. 224 (Ga. Ct. App. 1971)

Opinion

46317, 46318.

ARGUED JUNE 1, 1971.

DECIDED JULY 9, 1971.

Action for damages. Fulton Superior Court. Before Judge Pye.

Powell, Goldstein, Frazer Murphy, Edward E. Dorsey, Stuart E. Eizenstat, for appellant.

Wall Campbell, Alford Wall, Andrew W. Estes, for appellee.


These cases were brought to recover for damages arising from the illness of aplastic anemia caused by the consumption of chloromycetin, a drug manufactured by Parke, Davis Company. Counsel are in accord that the appellant pharmaceutical company gave proper and sufficient warning to the medical profession of the potential hazards accompanying the use of the drug chloromycetin. They also agree: that the drug was available to no one except by the prescription of a qualified medical doctor; that the dosages allegedly causing the aplastic anemia here were prescribed by a qualified doctor; and that the prescribing doctor had read all of these warnings issued by the company and knew of the possible dangers involved in the use of the drug. Under these circumstances, the company fulfilled its duty and no liability attached. Ordinarily, in the case of prescription drugs, a warning as to possible danger in its use to the prescribing physician is sufficient. Webb v. Sandoz Chemical Works, 85 Ga. App. 405 ( 69 S.E.2d 689); Stottlemire v. Cawood, (Dist. Col.) 213 F. Supp. 897; Davis v. Wyeth Laboratories, Inc., 399 F.2d 121 (6); Oppenheimer v. Sterling Drug, Inc., 7 Ohio App.2d 103 ( 219 N.E.2d 54); Johnston v. Upjohn Co. (Mo.) 442 S.W.2d 93 (1).

There are no facts in this case which might effectuate an exception to the rule such as that applied in the Wyeth Laboratories Case, supra; Love v. Wolf, 226 Cal.App.2d 378 (38 Cal.Rptr. 183); or Gottsdanker v. Cutter Laboratories, 182 Cal.App.2d 602 (6 Cal.Rptr. 320). See Annot. 79 ALR2d 290.

The judgments of the trial court denying appellant's motion for summary judgment are reversed with direction to enter judgment in each case for Parke, Davis Company, the defendant below.

Judgment reversed with direction. Pannell and Deen, JJ., concur.

ARGUED JUNE 1, 1971 — DECIDED JULY 9, 1971.


Summaries of

Parke, Davis Company v. Mayes

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jul 9, 1971
124 Ga. App. 224 (Ga. Ct. App. 1971)
Case details for

Parke, Davis Company v. Mayes

Case Details

Full title:PARKE, DAVIS COMPANY v. MAYES et al. (two cases)

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Jul 9, 1971

Citations

124 Ga. App. 224 (Ga. Ct. App. 1971)
183 S.E.2d 410

Citing Cases

Singleton v. Airco, Inc.

"Ordinarily, in the case of prescription drugs, a warning as to possible danger in its use to the prescribing…

Presto v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp.

(Citations and punctuation omitted.) Singleton v. Airco, Inc., 169 Ga. App. 662, 664 ( 314 S.E.2d 680)…