Legal Opinion

Christison v. Biogen Idec Inc.

District Court, D. Utah

Decided August 5, 2016No. Case No. 2:11-cv-01140-DN-DBPPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

David Nuffer, United States District Judge

Defendants Biogen Idee Inc. (“Biogen”) and Elan Pharmaceuticals (“Elan”) (collectively “Companies”) move for summary judgment on all of Mr. Christison’s claims (“Motion”).1 Mr. Christison opposes summary judgment (“Opposition”).2 For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is GRANTED.

CONTENTS

CONTENTS.. .1318

SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD.,.1318

CAUSES OF ACTION.. .1319

Elements of Negligence.. .1319

Elements of Negligent Failure to Warn... 1319

Elements of Negligent Misrepresentation. ..1320

UNDISPUTED…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1998
  2. Wyeth v. LevineSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  3. Ralston v. Smith & Nephew Richards, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2001
  4. Martin v. HackerNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  5. Wyeth Laboratories, Inc. v. FortenberryMississippi Supreme Court · 1988

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Rinder v. Merck Sharp & Dhome Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2019
  2. Nielson v. Harley Davidson Motor Company GroupDistrict Court, D. Utah · 2021
  3. Rinder v. Merck Sharp & Dhome Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2019
  4. Siddoway v. GSK (In re Avandia Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig.)District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2017
  5. Wells v. Kawasaki Motors Corporation USADistrict Court, D. Utah · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API