Legal Opinion

Maestas v. Sofamor Danek Group, Inc.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided December 21, 2000PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court 1

OPINION

2Opinion of the Court · HolderHolder, J.

in which ANDERSON, C.J., and BIRCH, and BARKER, JJ., joined.

The plaintiffs alleged that defendants’ products, surgically implanted in then-backs, were defective. The trial court granted summary judgment for defendants on grounds that the statute of limitations had expired. The plaintiffs appealed, contending that: 1) genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether the statute of limitations was tolled by the “discovery rule”; and 2) under the doctrine of “cross-jurisdictional tolling,” the statute of limitations was tolled during the period in which the plaintiffs sought class…

3Cases cited14 opinions

  1. American Pipe & Construction Co. v. UtahSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Crown, Cork & Seal Co. v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Steinberg v. Chicago Medical SchoolIllinois Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Wade v. Danek Medical, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1999
  5. Bell v. Showa Denko K.K., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1995

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

4Cited by35 opinions

  1. Clemens v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  2. Norman Redwing v. Catholic Bishop for the Diocese of MemphisTennessee Supreme Court · 2012
  3. In Re Adoption of A.M.H.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Hatfield v. Halifax PLC & HBOS PLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
  5. Stevens v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.Montana Supreme Court · 2010

30 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