Legal Opinion
Burks v. Abbot Laboratories
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided January 8, 2013No. Civil No. 08-3414 (JRT/JSM)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*907MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JOHN R. TUNHEIM, District Judge.
Rockland Burks and Adrienne Lawrence (“plaintiffs”) bring this failure to warn action against Abbott Laboratories (“Abbott”) and Mead Johnson & Company (“Mead”) individually and on behalf of their minor child, E.B. Plaintiffs allege that defendants’ powdered infant formula (“PIF”) was contaminated with Cronobacter sakazakii (C. sak), that E.B. became ill after being fed defendants’ PIF, and that the PIF was unreasonably dangerous because defendants failed to provide an adequate warning of the risks of C. sak infection.
In July 2009,…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Westberry v. Gislaved Gummi ABCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1999
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Khoday v. Symantec Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2015
- Security National Bank v. Abbott LaboratoriesDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 2013
- Jayne v. City of Sioux FallsDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2020
- Yanez v. Graco Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2014