Legal Opinion
Roginsky v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided April 18, 1966No. 64-Civ. 33PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CROAKE, District Judge.
The present action is one of over seventy cases assigned to the undersigned involving injuries alleged to have resulted from ingestion of the prescription drug MER/29, which was developed, tested and marketed by the Wm. S. Merrell Company, a division and formerly a subsidiary of the defendant. After a four week trial in the instant case, the first to be tried in this court, the jury responded as follows to the following interrogatories:
“Question No. 1: Was the ingestion of the Drug MER/29 by the plaintiff the proximate cause of the injuries of which he complains? Yes
“You…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Quentin Reynolds v. Westbrook Pegler, the Hearst Corporation and Hearst Consolidated Publications, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
- Reynolds v. PeglerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1954
- Faulk v. Aware, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
- Faulk v. Aware, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1964
- Kern v. News Syndicate Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
3Cited by2 opinions
- Sidney Roginsky v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967
- Sidney Roginsky v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967