423 F. App'x 878
11th Cir.2011Background
- Hughes appeals the district court's denial of her motion for reconsideration of summary judgment in favor of Stryker Sales and Howmedica on products liability and negligence claims related to a Trident hip prosthesis.
- The district court granted summary judgment on AEMLD-based products liability claims, finding no genuine causation issue without expert testimony.
- Hughes argued the evidence showed the cup contained manufacturing residuals that impeded biological fixation, rendering it defective.
- Evidence cited included a recall letter and a warning letter, but the district court found these insufficient to prove defect or causation under Alabama law and Rule 407.
- On Hughes's negligence claims, the court held there was no competent link between any alleged negligent manufacture and prosthesis failure, and that speculation cannot create a genuine fact issue.
- This court affirms the district court's summary judgment in favor of Stryker Sales and Howmedica on both products liability and negligence claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether summary judgment on AEMLD claims was correct | Hughes contends defects existed and caused injury. | defendants show no genuine defect-causation issue without expert | No genuine issue; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether Hughes provided a prima facie defect and causation case under AEMLD without expert testimony | Evidence can infer defect and causation from failure to biologically fix | Expert testimony required; evidence insufficient | Defect/cause not shown; no expert, no inference supports defect |
| Whether recall and warning letters create a genuine issue of defect | Letters show regulatory concern about device quality | Letters do not prove defect; inadmissible for defect under Rule 407 | Letters do not establish defect or causation |
| Whether summary judgment on the negligence claims was proper | Negligence by defendants caused prosthesis failure | No evidence linking failure to negligent conduct; speculation | No genuine causation issue; summary judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Goree v. Winnebago Indus., Inc., 958 F.2d 1537 (11th Cir. 1992) (elements of AEMLD claim: defect, causation, and sale)
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Haven Hills Farm, Inc., 395 So. 2d 991 (Ala. 1981) (mere failure of a product does not prove a defect)
- Case v. Eslinger, 555 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2009) (motions to amend should not raise new arguments; develop case)
- Cordoba v. Dillard’s, Inc., 419 F.3d 1169 (11th Cir. 2005) (speculation does not create a genuine issue of fact)
- Green v. Drug Enforcement Admin., 606 F.3d 1296 (11th Cir. 2010) (treatment of reconsideration/motion to amend)