Legal Opinion
In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Products Liability Litigation
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided February 7, 2003No. MDL 1407PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ RENEWED MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 23(B)(3) FOR ECONOMIC INJURY CLAIMS
ROTHSTEIN, District Judge.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs’ claims stem from their purchase of medication containing phenylpropanolamine (“PPA”). The court outlined the essential history involved in plaintiffs’ cases and the PPA multi-district litigation (“MDL”) generally in previous orders, including one denying certification in these cases. See Order Denying Certif. at 2 (Sept. 4, 2002). It is enough to repeat here that defendants, along with other entities responsible for…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Dianne Castano v. The American Tobacco CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1996
- In Re American Medical Systems, Inc. Pfizer, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- Six (6) Mexican Workers v. Arizona Citrus Growers Bodine Produce Company, Inc. Robert Fletcher, D/B/A Fletcher FarmsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Gabriel Carrera v. Bayer CorpCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2013
- Webb v. Carter's Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2011
- Randolph v. J.M. Smucker Co.District Court, S.D. Florida · 2014
- In re Conagra Peanut Butter Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 2008
- In re Neurontin Marketing & Sale Practices LitigationDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2007
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.