Ideus v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., No. 19-1361 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Plaintiff file a products liability action against Teva, the manufacturer of intrauterine devices, after she suffered complications from the implantation of an intrauterine device that broke and embedded inside her uterus.
The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to the manufacturer, holding that all Teva was required to do under Nebraska law was warn medical professionals like plaintiff's physician about the device's potential risks. The court explained that the Nebraska Supreme Court has indicated that it would follow the "overwhelming majority rule" and join other states in rejecting the prescription-contraceptives exception to the learned-intermediary doctrine.
Court Description: [Stras, Author, with Wollman and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products liability. Plaintiff brought this products liability action against the manufacturer of the intrauterine device which which broke in her uterus, and the district court granted the manufacturer's motion for summary judgment. Held: under Nebraska law, the manufacturer did not have a duty to warn plaintiff directly about the potential risks of using the device and the district court properly granted the manufacturer's motion for summary judgment; in this situation, Nebraska would apply the learned-intermediary doctrine, and there is no dispute that the manufacturer provided adequate warnings to plaintiff's physician; Nebraska would not apply an exception to the doctrine for prescription contraceptives, including IUDs. Judge Kelly, dissenting.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.