Legal Opinion
Hurley v. Lederle Laboratories, Division of American Cyanamid Co.
District Court, E.D. Texas
Decided December 31, 1986No. Civ. A. B-85-449-CAPublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
COBB, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, parents of James L. Hurley, III, had their son vaccinated against diphtheria, pertussis (whooping cough), and tetanus by using DPT vaccine when the child was less than a year old. The vaccine was manufactured and distributed by the defendants Lederle Laboratories (Lederle), and Connaught Laboratories, Inc. (Con-naught). Thereafter, the child sustained severe and irreversible neurological damage.
Plaintiffs, parents and son, brought this diversity action and base their claims on negligence [the alleged failure to adequately warn plaintiffs and…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- First Nat. Bank of Ariz. v. Cities Service Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
- San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Gibbons v. OgdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Felix v. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1989
- Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc. v. BaileyMississippi Supreme Court · 2004
- James L. Hurley, Jr., Etc. v. Lederle Laboratories Division of American Cyanamid Co., DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1989
- Wyeth Laboratories, Inc. v. FortenberryMississippi Supreme Court · 1988
- Clois Osburn and Anita Osburn v. Anchor Laboratories, Inc., Rachelle Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1987
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.