Uploaded April 2025 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Brown v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
751 P.2d 470 (1988)
Many drugs come with long lists warning of potential side effects.
Nevertheless, doctors and consumers may decide that the benefits outweigh the risks and prescribe and take the drugs. In Brown versus Superior Court, we'll explore whether drug manufacturers are strictly liable when a consumer is harmed by a properly prepared drug.
Jan Brown's mother took a prescription drug, diethylstilbestrol or DES that was designed to prevent miscarriage while pregnant with Brown. Unfortunately, unbeknownst to the manufacturers, the drug contained a cancer causing substance, which caused Brown and other plaintiffs severe injury.
Over one hundred seventy companies manufactured the drug. The manufacturers didn't provide a warning to consumers or doctors that the drug could cause cancer. Brown couldn't identify the manufacturer of the DES her mother took.
Brown and other plaintiffs sued the companies that manufactured DES in the San Francisco Superior Court under theories of strict liability, breach of express and implied warranty, fraud, and negligence.
Before trial, the trial court ruled that the manufacturers couldn't be held strictly liable for the alleged defect and could only be liable for failing to warn of its known or knowable side effects.
Brown sought a writ of mandate or prohibition in the California Court of Appeal to review the trial court's pretrial rulings. The court of appeal upheld the trial court's rulings. Brown appealed to the California Supreme Court.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/brown-v-superior-court-751-p-2d-470-1988
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/brown-v-superior-court-751-p-2d-470-1988
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Brown v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
751 P.2d 470 (1988)
Many drugs come with long lists warning of potential side effects.
Nevertheless, doctors and consumers may decide that the benefits outweigh the risks and prescribe and take the drugs. In Brown versus Superior Court, we'll explore whether drug manufacturers are strictly liable when a consumer is harmed by a properly prepared drug.
Jan Brown's mother took a prescription drug, diethylstilbestrol or DES that was designed to prevent miscarriage while pregnant with Brown. Unfortunately, unbeknownst to the manufacturers, the drug contained a cancer causing substance, which caused Brown and other plaintiffs severe injury.
Over one hundred seventy companies manufactured the drug. The manufacturers didn't provide a warning to consumers or doctors that the drug could cause cancer. Brown couldn't identify the manufacturer of the DES her mother took.
Brown and other plaintiffs sued the companies that manufactured DES in the San Francisco Superior Court under theories of strict liability, breach of express and implied warranty, fraud, and negligence.
Before trial, the trial court ruled that the manufacturers couldn't be held strictly liable for the alleged defect and could only be liable for failing to warn of its known or knowable side effects.
Brown sought a writ of mandate or prohibition in the California Court of Appeal to review the trial court's pretrial rulings. The court of appeal upheld the trial court's rulings. Brown appealed to the California Supreme Court.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/brown-v-superior-court-751-p-2d-470-1988
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/brown-v-superior-court-751-p-2d-470-1988
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
