Medical Risk Law Weekly News

Week of: April 09, 2012


Group Lacks Standing to Prevent FDA from Approving Vaccines Feared to Cause Autism

An advocacy group concerned with the potential future effect of certain vaccinations does not have standing to sue the FDA to suspend approval of the vaccinations.


FDA Files Complaint Seeking to Stop Distribution of Fish Due to Risk of Botulism

The FDA, in a complaint filed by the Department of Justice, is seeking to stop the processing and distribution of fish products at a California company because of a risk of botulism and other food hazards.

U.S. Marshals Seize Unapproved and Misbranded Drug Products at Missouri Distributor

The associate commissioner for regulatory affairs for the FDA and the Acting U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Missouri announced that U.S. Marshals seized drugs being held by Notions-n-Things Distribution of Bogard, Mo. 

Action Taken to Address Tobacco Epidemic

The FDA released two separate draft guidance documents to help fight the tobacco epidemic and stop children from using tobacco.


Conservator Must Show Medical Necessity of Toe Amputation to Which Conservatee Objects

In a case of first impression, a California appellate court held that a court-appointed conservator seeking the court’s consent to medical treatment of an involuntarily detained mentally ill person who objects to the treatment must show that it is medically necessary.

Consent to Wife’s IVF Did Not Create Contract Between Fertility Clinic and Husband; Husband Had Action Against Wife for Fraud

A fertility clinic that requires the husband’s consent prior to performing in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures upon the wife is not in a contractual relationship with the husband. Therefore, a husband could not maintain a claim against the clinic for breach of contract.

California Can Opt Out of Physician Supervision of CRNAs as Prerequisite to Medicare/Medicaid Reimbursement

A decision by the Governor of California to opt out of three provisions of Medicare and Medicaid regulations, requiring certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNA) to be supervised by physicians as a prerequisite to reimbursement, was upheld by the appellate court.