790 F. Supp. 2d 410
D. Maryland2011Background
- Williams underwent a total vaginal hysterectomy and cystoscopy at Portsmouth Naval Medical Center on February 8, 2008.
- Preoperative ultrasounds showed no evidence of a foreign object in Williams's pelvis.
- Gyrus Forceps designed, manufactured, and sold by defendants were used during the procedure, and a portion allegedly detached and remained in Williams's body.
- Williams experienced immediate post-surgical abdominal pain and pressure that persisted for months.
- In July 2009, a CT scan identified a foreign object in Williams's pelvis; a subsequent surgery removed a shim from the site.
- Williams asserts six claims: negligence, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, and three strict liability theories.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| What law governs strict liability claims? | Williams argues Maryland public policy requires Maryland law on strict liability. | Gyrus/OAI argue lex loci delicti dictates Virginia law since injury occurred there. | Virginia law governs; strict liability claims dismissed under Virginia law. |
| Does the public policy exception apply to avoid Virginia law? | Maryland public policy strongly favors strict products liability. | Maryland public policy exception does not apply; policy not strong enough to override Virginia law. | Public policy exception not satisfied; Virginia law applies. |
| Is Olympus America, Inc. liable as a successor to the Gyrus Defendants for pre-acquisition injuries? | OAI should bear liability for injuries arising from the same products. | OAI was not affiliated with the Gyrus Defendants when the claims arose; not liable. | OAI not liable; Counts IV–VI dismissed as to all defendants; summary judgment for Olympus on remaining counts. |
| What is the disposition of Counts IV–VI? | Counts IV–VI should proceed under applicable strict liability theories. | Counts IV–VI should be dismissed under lex loci delicti and lack of charity for successor liability. | Counts IV–VI dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Elec. Mfg. Co., 313 U.S. 487 (1941) (outlines choice-of-law rules in federal diversity)
- Philip Morris Inc. v. Angeletti, 358 Md. 689 (2000) (adheres to lex loci delicti for torts in Maryland)
- Lab. Corp. of Am. v. Hood, 911 A.2d 841 (Md. 2006) (public policy exception reviewed for choice-of-law)
- Harford Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bruchey, 248 Md. 669 (1968) (public policy considerations in choice-of-law)
- Texaco, Inc. v. Vanden Bosche, 242 Md. 334 (1966) (public policy and choice-of-law principles)
- Phipps v. Gen. Motors Corp., 278 Md. 337 (1976) (adoption of strict liability in Maryland context)