Legal Opinion

Oksenholt v. Lederle Laboratories

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 30, 1981No. A7808-13974, CA 16160PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGillette, P. J.

In this action by the plaintiff physician against the defendant manufacturer of a prescription drug, the trial court sustained defendant’s motion to strike plaintiff’s complaint, without leave to plead further, on the express ground that the damages which plaintiff sought to recover were not cognizable under Oregon law under the causes of action pleaded. Plaintiff appeals from the subsequent judgment for the defendant. We reverse.

We take the facts from plaintiff’s complaint. Defendant manufactures the drug Myambutol, which is used in the treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis. Literature…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Brennen v. City of EugeneOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  2. McEwen v. Ortho Pharmaceutical CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  3. State Ex Rel. Western Seed Production Corp. v. CampbellOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  4. McEvoy v. HeliksonOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Mezyk v. National Repossessions, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1965

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Norwest v. Presbyterian Intercommunity HospitalCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
  2. Ammons v. Jackson CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  3. Knepper v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  4. Besmehn v. Pacific Coast Shipping Co. MonroviaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
  5. De Jaray v. Lattice Semiconductor CorporationDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2023

1 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