Legal Opinion
Evraets v. Intermedics Intraocular, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 26, 1994No. B073283PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BOREN, P. J.
An individual was injured by an intraocular lens that had been surgically implanted in his eye. He sued the manufacturer and distributor of the device for damages. His suit was dismissed by the trial court.
We conclude that the victim’s claims of negligence and strict liability under state tort law are preempted by federal law. His claim for breach of the implied warranty of fitness fails for lack of privity. However, his breach of express warranty and fraud claims, as well as his negligence per se claim that the manufacturer violated numerous federal regulations governing…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Hillsborough County v. Automated Medical Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Cardinal Health 301, Inc. v. Tyco Electronics Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2008
- Scott v. CIBA Vision Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1995
- Arnold v. Dow Chemical CompanyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Coleman v. Medtronic, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2014
- Jessen v. Mentor Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2008
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.