The plaintiff received a prescription from LessPay drug store for an otic suspension as treatment for acute severe left otitis media with bullous myringitis. After using the otic suspension for a few days, the plaintiff suffered severe and permanent injuries, including brain damage. The plaintiff claims that he carefully used the drug as directed on the labeling, but contends that the otic suspension was not properly labeled in that it did not contain a warning that the use of the suspension should be discontinued in case of symptoms of tympanic membrane rupture. The manufacturer does package the drug product in a box that contains this warning and the manufacturer’s labeling directs the pharmacist to dispense the product in this box. The package insert for the drug also contains the warning. The pharmacist, however, allegedly dispensed the drug without the box. The plaintiff contends that his injury was caused due to the defective and unreasonably dangerous manner in which the drug was dispensed (without appropriate labeling and warning). Plaintiff sued the drug manufacturer on the basis of strict liability and the pharmacy on the basis of strict liability and negligence.

a. Discuss whether the drug manufacturer should be liable for strict liability?

b. Discuss whether the pharmacy should be liable for strict liability, including how it would change the plaintiff’s elements of proof from negligence.

c. What are the social policy consequences if the court finds the pharmacy in this case liable for strict liability?