Legal Opinion

Whitson v. Safeskin Corp., Inc.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided March 25, 2004No. 3:03 CV 746PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

MUNLEY, District Judge.

Before the court for disposition is the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The motion has been fully briefed and argued and is ripe for disposition. For the following reasons, we will grant the defendants’ motion.

Background 1

Plaintiff Jean Whitson was employed as a registered nurse at Hanover General Hospital in Hanover, Pennsylvania, from April 21, 1990 to June 25, 1997. As a nurse, she used and was exposed to natural rubber latex gloves. As a consequence of her exposure to latex gloves, Ms. Whit-son has suffered a permanent hypersensitivity to products…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  4. Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  5. Robin Chamberlain v. Vincent C. Giampapa, M.D., Individually and Dba Plastic Surgery Center InternationaleCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Wolfe v. McNeil-PPC, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
  2. Adesina v. Aladan Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API