Legal Opinion
Pfizer, Inc. v. Farsian
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided August 30, 1996No. 1941153PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has certified to this Court the following question, pursuant to Rule 18, Ala.R.App.P.:
"Does a heart valve implantee have a valid cause of action for fraud under Alabama law if he asserts that the valve's manufacturer fraudulently induced him to have the valve implanted when the damages that he asserts do not include an injury-producing malfunction of the product because the valve has been and is working properly?"
Facts
Garshasb Farsian sued Shiley, Inc., and its parent, corporation, Pfizer, Inc. (hereinafter collectively referred to…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Helen W. ANGUS, Appellant, v. SHILEY INC.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Spuhl v. Shiley, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1990
- Treadwell Ford, Inc. v. CampbellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1986
- Brinkman v. Shiley, Inc.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1989
- Walus v. Pfizer, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1993
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Briehl v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1999
- In Re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. Tires ProductsDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 2001
- In Re Telectronics Pacing Systems, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2001
- Crutcher v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 2009
- Williamson v. Indianapolis Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1999
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.