> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.fdaweb.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Most Courts Pay Due Regard to Boxed Warnings: Post
- URL: https://www.fdaweb.com/most-courts-pay-due-regard-to-boxed-warnings-post/
- Published: 2017-07-12T12:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-09-14T22:33:55.000Z
- Author: David McFarland
- Tags: Drugs, Devices, #legacy-id-D5139113

Attorney **James Beck** (Reed Smith) writes in an online [post](http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2b762e39-8f4d-4f31-88cc-92806ef4b00a&ref=fdaweb.com) that while a Missouri court last year held that an FDA-approved Boxed Warning was not only inadequate but so poor as to be worthy of punitive damages, most courts have found that Boxed Warnings are adequate as a matter of law. “In our view,” Beck writes after citing several cases, “the bottom line with Boxed Warnings is **(1)** the presence of a Boxed Warning concerning the relevant risk of a prescription medical product demonstrates that the risk is adequately warned about and sufficiently emphasized, making the warning adequate as a matter of law; and **(2)** since FDA controls the content of Boxed Warnings, any allegations that existing Boxed Warnings are inadequate are necessarily preempted.”