Amendment no. 7  “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”  Basically- In a common law case, it will be tried by a jury.

Right Brain/ Left Brain Bruesewitz v. Wyeth  This is not an autism case, but involves the rights to sue a vaccine manufacturer for design defect claims outside of the court system set up 25 years ago in the Vaccine Act.  Justice Scalia wrote the decision, with Justice Breyer submitting a concurring statement and Justice Sotomayor writing the dissent. It was a 6-2 decision, with Justices Sotomayor and Ginsberg dissenting and Justice Kagan not participating.  The parents had already brought their case to the Court of Federal Claims, which ruled against them. They did not accept the ruling and took their case to other courts. Eventually landing in the Supreme Court of the United States.

Right brain/ Left brain (cont’)  The Supreme Court ruled:  For the foregoing reasons, we hold that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act preempts all design-defect claims against vaccine manufactures brought by plaintiffs who seek compensation for injury or death caused by vaccine side effects. The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.  The parents had argued that they could sue under a “design defect” argument, and “strict liability”.  They claimed that the manufacturer of the vaccine can be sued because a safer vaccine could have been produced and avoided the injury.  They aren’t arguing the facts of the case- whether the vaccine caused injury whether they had the right to sue in a civil court based on the “design defect” claim.

Right Brain/ Left brain & 7 th amendment  In the court’s discussion is this:  “Design defects don’t merit a single mention in the Act or in Food and Drug Administration regulations that pervasively regulate the drug manufacturing process. This lack of guidance for design defects, combined with the extensive guidance for the two liability grounds specifically mentioned in the Act, strongly suggests that design defects weren’t mentioned because they aren’t a basis for liability. The Act’s mandates lead to the same conclusion. It provides for federal agency improvement of vaccine design and for federally prescribed compensation, which are other means for achieving the two beneficial effects of design-defects torts-prompting the development of improved designs, and providing compensation for inflicted injuries.

Cited Sources:  court-decides-bruesewitz-v-wyeth/ court-decides-bruesewitz-v-wyeth/ 