Legal Opinion
Jones v. Allercare, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Ohio
Decided February 2, 2001No. 1:00CV257PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum of Opinion and Order
GAUGHAN, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court- upon Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification (Doc. 52). This case arises out of plaintiffs’ alleged personal injury and property damage following the application of AllerCare Dust Mite Carpet Powder (hereafter “Powder”) and/or AllerCare Dust Mite Allergen Spray (hereafter “Spray”) to carpeting and/or furniture. For the following reasons, the Motion is DENIED.
FACTS
Plaintiffs are residents of Ohio.1 (Compl.¶ 2). Defendant is a Wisconsin corporation and the manufacturer of the Powder and…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Gulf Oil Co. v. BernardSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Henry Schein, Inc. v. StromboeTexas Supreme Court · 2002
- In Re Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litigation, Jeanne Jaros, on Their Own Behalf and as Representatives of Classes of Similarly Situated Persons v. E.I. Dupont, in Re Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litigation, E.S. Criswell, Arel Quessenberry, Luther Stacy, Jr., Raymond L. Swaim, Betty L. Swaim, James R. Swaim and John S. Swaim, on Their Own Behalf and as Representatives of Classes of Similarly Situated Persons v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours and General Electric Company, in Re Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litigation, Chuck Seaman, as Personal Representative for Frieda Theresa Seaman, Deceased Mark Seaman, Jr. Chuck Seaman v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours and Company, a Delaware Corporation General Electric Company, a New York Corporation, in Re Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litigation, Andra L. Evenson v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours and Company, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in Re Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litigation, Kathryn Hamilton, Diana Cottam, James and Janet Boyd and Connie Soper, on Their Own Behalf and as Representatives of Classes of Similarly Situated Persons v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours and Company General Electric Co. Unc, Inc., Atlantic Richfield Company, Rockwell International Corporation, Westinghouse Electric Corporation and Westinghouse Hanford Company, in Re Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litigation, Rosemary Miller v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours General ElectricCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Schnall v. AT&T Wireless Services, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2011
- Schnall v. AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES, INC.Washington Supreme Court · 2011
- Dage v. Time Warner CableDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2005
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.