Legal Opinion
Hunt v. McNeil Consumer Healthcare
District Court, E.D. Louisiana
Decided March 11, 2014No. Civil Action No. 11-457PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND REASONS
JANE TRICHE MILAZZO, District Judge.
Defendants have raised the affirmative defense of preemption. The question presented is whether Plaintiffs product liability claims are preempted by federal law. For the following reasons, the Court finds Defendants have failed to carry their burden of demonstrating preemption.
BACKGROUND
This a pharmaceutical products liability action. Plaintiff Keisha Hunt suffered personal injury on February 4, 2010 after ingesting Children’s Motrin — a non-prescription drug manufactured by Defendants McNeil Consumer Healthcare1 *697(“McNeil”) and Johnson &…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- English v. General Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Wyeth v. LevineSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Maryland v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Crosby v. National Foreign Trade CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Cerveny v. Aventis, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017
- Trejo v. Johnson, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Batoh v. McNeil-PPC, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2016
- Brazil v. Janssen Research & Development LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 2016
- Brown v. JohnsonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.