Abco developed a new drug, ZB, for treatment of Wegener's disease. Abco extensively tested ZB for several years on animals and human volunteers and observed no undesirable side effects. The federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) then approved ZB for sale as a prescription drug. Five other drug companies, each acting independently, developed drugs identical to ZB. Each of these drugs was also approved by the FDA for sale as a prescription drug. True Blue Drug, a wholesaler, bought identically shaped pills from all six of the manufacturers and sold the pills to drugstores as Wegener's X. This drug had a long-delayed side effect. Sons of male users of Wegener's X are sterile. One such son, Crane, brought an action against Abco for his damages. Abco, through True Blue Drug, supplied about 10 percent of the Wegener's X sold in the state where Crane lived. It is not possible to establish which of the six companies supplied the particular pills that Crane's father took. If Crane asserts a claim against Abco based on strict liability in tort, which of the following will be a decisive question in determining whether Crane will prevail?
Does the res ipsa loquitur doctrine apply? Can liability be imposed on Abco without proof that Abco knew that the drug had an undesirable side effect? Is Abco relieved of liability by the FDA approval of the drug? Can liability be imposed on Abco without showing that its pills were used by Crane's father