Gannon v. American Home Products, Inc.
211 N.J. 454
N.J.2012Background
- Plaintiffs Jamie and Rebecca Gannon allege Jamie developed medulloblastoma after five polio vaccines given 1973–1976.
- Federal suit against United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act claimed negligent vaccine approval; district court granted judgment for the United States under Rule 52(c); Third Circuit affirmed.
- State court action against Lederle Laboratories, American Cyanamid, WyethLederle Vaccines sought identification of the vaccine manufacturer and product liability; trial court granted summary judgment on product identification and collateral estoppel.
- Appellate Division reversed, finding error in product identification standard and declining collateral estoppel; remanded for discovery and trial; then this Court granted certification.
- This Court held federal law governs collateral estoppel analysis of a federal judgment, rejected the Appellate Division’s Restatement-based equitable exceptions, and reversed the Appellate Division, remanding for appropriate further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which law governs collateral estoppel for a federal judgment | Gannon: federal law governs preclusion of federal judgments | Lederle: state law may apply and govern preclusion analysis | Federal law governs collateral estoppel |
| Full and fair opportunity to litigate causation in the federal action | Gannon: plaintiffs were not fully heard on causation due to limitations on experts | Defendants: plaintiffs had full and fair opportunity; no reversible error | Plaintiffs were afforded full and fair opportunity; issues decided against them |
| Appellate Division's use of Restatement equitable exceptions | Gannon: Restatement §§ 28, 29 properly applied to permit relief | Lederle: equitable exceptions were misapplied and overly broad | Appellate Division erred; equitable exceptions do not defeat federal collateral estoppel when elements are met |
Key Cases Cited
- Watkins v. Resorts Int’l Hotel & Casino, Inc., 124 N.J. 398 (N.J. 1991) (federal-law governs preclusion of federal judgments in state court)
- Semtek Int’l, Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 531 U.S. 497 (S. Ct. 2001) (federal preclusion principles control choice-of-law analysis for federal judgments)
- Duvall v. A.G. of the United States, 436 F.3d 382 (3d Cir. 2006) (equitable Restatement § 28 considerations discussed in collateral estoppel context)
- Wells v. Rockefeller, 728 F.2d 209 (3d Cir. 1984) (Restatement § 29 considered in collateral estoppel context)
- National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Pa. Public Util. Comm’n, 288 F.3d 519 (3d Cir. 2002) (equitable considerations in collateral estoppel analyzed)