Phyllis Sinclair, Joseph Murray and Robbie L. Traylor

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the Products Liability Act (PLA) requires a manifest physical injury and therefore does not permit recovery of medical‑monitoring costs for plaintiffs who alleged only a heightened risk from Vioxx. The Court also held that the Consumer Fraud Act cannot provide an alternative remedy because the PLA is the exclusive source of relief for product‑liability claims. The majority reversed the Appellate Division and remanded for reinstatement of the trial‑court dismissal; Justice Long dissented, arguing that the PLA’s definition of harm should be read to include medical‑monitoring damages.