Legal Opinion
Coursen v. A.H. Robins Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 3, 1985No. Nos. 84-3854 to 84-3861PublishedCited by 134 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SKOPIL, Circuit Judge:
These consolidated appeals are from judgments in actions for compensatory and punitive damages instituted by plaintiffs against defendant, A.H. Robins Co., Inc. (“Robins”), manufacturer of a contraceptive intrauterine device known as the Dai-kon Shield. Plaintiffs raise a number of evidentiary and other legal issues on appeal. For reasons stated below, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand in part.
FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW
Each plaintiff maintained that she had been injured by use of the Daikon Shield by contracting pelvic inflammatory disease (“PID”). PID is a…
2Cases cited66 opinions
- Luce v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Hoptowit v. RayCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- McLINN v. FJORDCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Milton Lecompte v. Mr. Chip, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1976
- Palmer v. AH Robins Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1984
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by134 opinions
- Concha v. LondonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Daniel Campbell v. City of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- Ellen v. Spain v. Tony E. Gallegos, Chairman, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- Lambert v. AckerleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Troy Swinton v. Potomac Corporation, Dba Crescent Cardboard Company, Dba crescent/u.s. MatCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
129 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.