Legal Opinion
Brown v. American Home Products Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 8, 2006No. MDL No. 1203; Civ.A. No. 99-20593PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND PRETRIAL ORDER NO.
BARTLE, Chief Judge.
Certain class members in this Nationwide Class Action Settlement involving Wyeth’s1 diet drugs Pondimin and Redux have now moved for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
This court, after a fairness hearing, certified the class and approved the Nationwide Class Action Settlement Agreement (“Settlement Agreement”) in Memorandum and Pretrial Order (“PTO”) No. 1415 on August 28, 2000. Movants, who did not file their 60(b) motion until over four years thereafter, seek to overturn PTO No. 1415. They want…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Phillips Petroleum Co. v. ShuttsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- American Home Products Corp. v. SumlinMississippi Supreme Court · 2006
- In Re Diet Drugs Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
- United States v. STULERDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
- United States v. STULERDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2019