Legal Opinion
Brinkman v. Shiley, Inc.
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Decided June 7, 1989No. Civ. A. 88-1846PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
RAMBO, District Judge.
Plaintiffs brought this action alleging defendants are (1) strictly liable under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A, for supplying a defective product; (2) liable in negligence; (3) liable for breach of warranty; and (4) in violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. §§ 301-392 (1984) (the FDCA). The defendants have filed an answer and a motion for summary judgment. The defendants’ statement of undisputed facts (Motion for Summary Judgment, Exhibit 1), sets forth the events underlying the complaint and is adopted for purposes of this memorandum.…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Don Chuy, in No. 77-1412 v. The Philadelphia Eagles Football Club (Sued as "The Philadelphia Eagles"), in No. 77-1411 and the National Football LeagueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
- Sinn v. BurdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Wisniewski v. Johns-Manville Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Helen W. ANGUS, Appellant, v. SHILEY INC.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Nina Michael v. Shiley, Inc. Hospital Products Group, Inc., (Formerly Howmedica, Inc.) Pfizer, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
- No. 93-5555Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- Bowling v. Pfizer, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1992
- In Re Telectronics Pacing Systems, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2001
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.