Legal Opinion

Smith v. E R Squibb & Sons, Inc

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 10, 1979No. 58894, (Calendar No. 5)PublishedCited by 122 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtColeman, C.J.

This product liability case arose from the acute anaphylactic (extreme hypersensitivity) reaction resulting in the death of Shirley Smith which occurred when Renografin-60, a product of defendant E. R. Squibb & Sons, Inc., was injected into her blood stream. Such sensitivity is extremely rare and cannot be discovered prior to injection. It is undisputed and clearly reflected in the record that there was no intrinsic defect in the drug.

Plaintiff named the drug manufacturer, various *85doctors and the hospital as defendants in the action. Upon trial by jury, one doctor received a directed verdict…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Piercefield v. Remington Arms Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1965
  2. McEwen v. Ortho Pharmaceutical CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Rainbow v. Albert Elia Building Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975
  4. Denolf v. Frank L Jursik Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Judis v. Borg-Warner CorporationMichigan Supreme Court · 1954

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

3Cited by122 opinions

  1. Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. ZenobiaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  2. Prentis v. Yale Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Seley v. G. D. Searle & Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1981
  4. In Re Certified QuestionsMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Wolfgruber v. Upjohn Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979

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

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

Powered by the Exa API