History
  • No items yet
midpage
Scholl v. LEDERLE LABORATORIES DIVISION
684 F. Supp. 246
| D. Ariz. | 1987
|
Check Treatment
684 F.Supp. 246 (1987)

Thomas Jason SCHOLL, etc., et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
LEDERLE LABORATORIES DIVISION, etc., et al., Defendants.

No. CIV 85-409 TUC-RMB.

United States District Court, D. Arizona.

November 10, 1987.

ORDER

Janice A. Wezelman, Miller & Pitt, Tucson, Ariz., Andrew W. Dodd, Denver & Dodd, Torrance, Cal., for plaintiffs.

D. B. Udall, Chandler, Tullar, Udall & Redhair, Tucson, Ariz., Odette L. Ashley, Haight, Dickson, Brown & Bonesteel, Santa Monica, Cal., for Lederle Laboratories.

John Reiner, Herzfeld & Rubin, Los Angeles, Cal., Darwin J. Nelson, Kimble, Gothreau, Nelson & Cannon, Tucson, Ariz., for Connaught Laboratories.

BILBY, Chief Judge.

The Court, having read all the cases submitted by counsel, finds the reasoning most persuasive in Patten v. Lederle Laboratories, 655 F.Supp. 745 (D.Utah, 1987).

Neither the statute, congressional intent, or logic mandate a holding that the federal government has preempted state tort law in this area.

IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants' Motions For Partial Summary Judgment are DENIED.

Case Details

Case Name: Scholl v. LEDERLE LABORATORIES DIVISION
Court Name: District Court, D. Arizona
Date Published: Nov 10, 1987
Citation: 684 F. Supp. 246
Docket Number: CIV 85-409 TUC-RMB
Court Abbreviation: D. Ariz.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.