Legal Opinion
Kalinowski v. EI Du Pont De Nemours and Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 12, 1994No. Civ. A. 92-2511PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
TROUTMAN, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff Patricia Kalinowski seeks damages for personal injuries allegedly resulting from the failure of a temporomandibular joint (TMJ) prosthesis fashioned from Pro-plast, a patented and trademarked product manufactured and sold by a now bankrupt entity, Vitek. 1 Defendant DuPont manufac tures and sells polytetraflourethylene (PTFE), a component of Proplast, which is sold under the tradename Teflon. 2 Plaintiff Thomas Kalinowski likewise seeks damages for loss of consortium as a result of his wife’s alleged injuries.
In their complaint plaintiffs…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Berkebile v. Brantly Helicopter Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Azzarello v. Black Bros. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Dambacher by Dambacher v. MallisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Mazzagatti v. Everingham by EveringhamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- MacKowick v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Annamarie Lamontagne, Doreen A. Festa and Susan B. Pregler v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- In Re TMJ Implants Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1995
- Parker v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1995
- Kealoha v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- In Re Silicone Gel Breast Implants Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama · 1995
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.