Legal Opinion

Ferrari v. Johnson & Johnson, Inc.

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided May 21, 2019No. AC41170PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAlvord, J.

The plaintiff, Raymond C. Ferrari, appeals from the summary judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the defendants, Johnson & Johnson, Inc., and Synthes, Inc. The plaintiff claims that the court erred by holding that (1) he cannot prove that the defendants' product was defective, or that the product's alleged defect caused the plaintiff's injury, without the use of expert testimony, and (2) the learned intermediary doctrine barred the plaintiff's failure to warn claim. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The following undisputed facts and procedural history are relevant to our…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Potter v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  2. Giglio v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
  3. Hurley v. Heart Physicians, P.C.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
  4. Episcopal Church in Diocese of Connecticut v. GaussSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011
  5. Breen v. Synthes-Stratec, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2008

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Amity Partners v. Woodbridge Associates, L.P.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2020
  2. Cleaveland v. Home Depot USA IncDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2025
  3. Kissel v. Center for Women's Health, P.C.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2021
  4. Marvin v. Board of EducationConnecticut Appellate Court · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API