Legal Opinion

In re Paxil Litigation

District Court, C.D. California

Decided August 29, 2003No. CV 01-07937 MRPPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER RE:

Motion for Class Certification Motion to Dismiss Non-California Plaintiffs

PFAELZER, District Judge.

I. Introduction

Defendant SmithKline Beecham Corporation, d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline Inc. (“GSK”) manufactures and sells Paxil, a prescription drug indicated for, among other things, depression, panic disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, and social anxiety. Plaintiffs, who are current and past users of Paxil, allege that whatever beneficial effects Paxil may bestow upon patients, those effects are far outweighed by the alarming effects that some patients endure…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. United States v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
  3. East Texas Motor Freight System, Inc. v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. Susan Kanter Sharon Plunk v. Warner-Lambert Co. And Pfizer Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
  5. Staton v. Boeing Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Lozano v. AT & T Wireless Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  2. Johnson v. GlaxoSmithKline, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2008
  3. In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2010
  4. Brazil v. Dole Food Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2013
  5. Sepulveda v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2006

2 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