Legal Opinion

Schoenborn v. Stryker Corp.

District Court, D. Oregon

Decided July 11, 2011No. Civ. 08-1419-AAPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

AIKEN, Chief Judge:

Plaintiffs filed suit alleging products liability and negligence after a medical device known as a “pain pump” was used to administer local anesthetics to plaintiff Eric Schoenborn’s shoulder joint after arthroscopic surgery. Plaintiffs seek economic, non-economic, and punitive damages. Defendants Stryker Corporation and Stryker Sales Corporation (collectively Stryker) were the alleged manufacturer and distributer of the pain pump.

Stryker now moves for summary judgment on plaintiffs’ claims, Stryker argues that it did not know and could not have known of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  2. McEwen v. Ortho Pharmaceutical CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  3. PhotoMedex, Inc. v. IrwinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  4. Andor v. United Air Lines, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Vaughn v. GD Searle & CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1975

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Phelps v. Wyeth, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2013
  2. Huggins v. Stryker Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2013
  3. Mack v. Stryker Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2012
  4. Block v. Woo Young Medical Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API