Legal Opinion
Healey v. I-Flow, LLC
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided April 10, 2012No. Civ. No. 09-3541 (JRT/JJK)PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM
JEFFREY J. KEYES, United States Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amend his Complaint to Assert a Claim for Punitive Damages (Doc. No. 66). Based on the files, and all the records and proceedings herein, and on the arguments of counsel, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amend his Complaint to Assert a Claim for Punitive Damages (Doc. No. 66), is DENIED; and
2. The attached Memorandum is incorporated by reference.
MEMORANDUM
I. Background
I-Flow manufactures Pain Buster® pain pumps, which are “medical…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs' Legal CommitteeSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Jepson v. General Casualty Co. of WisconsinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
- Booth v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1988
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Doe YZ v. Shattuck-St. Mary's SchoolDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2016
- Bhatia v. 3M Co.District Court, D. Maine · 2018
- Mack v. Stryker Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2012
- Benner v. St. Paul Pub. Sch.District Court, D. Maine · 2019
- Benner v. Saint Paul Public Schools, I.S.D. 625District Court, D. Minnesota · 2019
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.