This is a trickier issue than the linked article suggests. The Supreme Court has held that the manufacturers of generic drugs cannot be sued based on the warnings/instructions/etc. on their drugs, because, by law, generic drugs must have the same labeling as the name-brand drugs. So, while the person in the Alabama only took the generic drug, he was suing based on allegedly inaccurate/incomplete warnings, which are the responsibility of the brand name manufacturer.
No.
The FDA is responsible for all warnings, not the manufacturer. That is why we have the agency.
If the FDA is incompetent (like most agencies) then it should be eliminated.
This suit is nothing more than going after the deepest pockets possible as the generic manufacturer is probably tiny.
Also, can the plaintiff prove that the drug is identical to the original or were ingredients sourced elsewhere (which is very common), that could lead to a chemical interaction?
Unless the plaintiff can show some defect in the original patented product, and that the product taken is an exact duplicate, it has no merit whatsoever.