Legal Opinion

Reichel v. Dalkon Shield Trust (In Re A.H. Robins Co.)

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided March 26, 1997No. 95-1031PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Vacated and remanded by published opinion. Judge WIDENER wrote the opinion, in which Judge RUSSELL and Senior Judge CHAPMAN joined.

OPINION

WIDENER, Circuit Judge:

Certain Daikon Shield claimants appeal the district court’s order holding that Claims Resolution Facility (CRF) § G.2 does not create a presumption of causation in favor of the claimant, and that the rules governing alternative dispute resolution (ADR) promulgated by the Trust are consistent with the Debtor’s Sixth Amended and Restated Plan of Reorganization and related documents and are therefore enforceable. While we conclude that…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Mobile, Jackson & Kansas City Railroad v. TurnipseedSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  2. Menard-Sanford v. A.H. Robins Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Minnie Florence Breeden v. Caspar W. Weinberger, Secretary Health, Education, and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1974
  4. Grant Foster and Barbara Dunn Foster v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1968
  5. In Re AH Robins Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 1988

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Rubens v. MasonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
  2. Rubens v. MasonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
  3. In Re A.H. Robins Company, Incorporated, Debtor. Cheslene Bledsoe Barbara Raygor, Claimants-Appellants v. Dalkon Shield Trust, Trust-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1997
  4. In Re Robins Company, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1997
  5. Rubens v. MasonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API