Legal Opinion

Agosto v. Trusswal Systems Corp.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided March 23, 1992No. Civ. A. No. 91-1557PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

HUYETT, District Judge.

Plaintiff has brought suit against defendant under a products liability theory. Part of Plaintiff’s claim for relief is for future pain and suffering and permanent loss of earning capacity. Plaintiff has tested positive for infection with the HIV virus and Defendant Ross Operating Valve Company (“Ross”), through a motion to compel, seeks access to Plaintiff’s medical records and seeks to depose Plaintiff further about his medical history. Plaintiff refuses to answer questions relating to his HIV condition and refuses to consent to the disclosure of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. RomaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1959
  2. Tarrant County Hospital District v. HughesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1987
  3. South Fla. Blood Serv. v. RasmussenDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  4. Doe v. RoeCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1989
  5. Application of MS Hershey Med. Ctr.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Stevens v. Bangor & Aroostook RailroadCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1996
  2. Aiello v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthorityCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  3. Commonwealth v. Doe, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lehigh County1998
  4. Scott v. United Corp.District Court, Virgin Islands · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API