Woodcock v. Mylan, Inc.
District Court, S.D. West Virginia
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JOSEPH R. GOODWIN, Chief Judge.
Pending before the court is the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Docket 15]. The Motion presents two sets of issues. First, the Motion raises a choice-of-law issue. The defendants contend that Alabama law governs all of the plaintiffs claims. The plaintiff disagrees and argues that West Virginia law applies to her marketing defect claim. Second, regardless of which state’s substantive law applies, the Motion challenges the sufficiency of the Complaint. As explained below, Alabama law governs the substantive issues in this case, except…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Papasan v. AllainSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Raab v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.District Court, S.D. West Virginia · 2015
- Tyree v. Boston Scientific Corp.District Court, S.D. West Virginia · 2014
- VITATOE v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.District Court, N.D. West Virginia · 2010
- Holley v. Gilead Sciences, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2023
- Newhouse v. Ethicon IncDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · 2020