Legal Opinion
Gardiner v. A.H. Robins Co.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided November 2, 1984No. Nos. 84-5061, 84-5062PublishedCited by 214 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court by
LAY, Chief Judge, and BRIGHT and ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
These appeals arise out of two tort actions claiming serious injuries as a result of the plaintiffs’ use of the Daikon Shield, an intrauterine contraceptive device. The cases were settled, and both complaints have therefore been dismissed with prejudice. The Settlement Agreement, however, obligates the corporate defendant, A.H. Robins Company, Incorporated (Robins), to preserve and produce certain documentary evidence in other cases brought by other plaintiffs represented by the same law firm that is counsel for…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- In Re Murchison.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Wisconsin v. ConstantineauSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Cobbledick v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Berger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by214 opinions
- Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Richardson-Merrell Inc. v. Koller Ex Rel. KollerSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Anago Franchising, Inc. v. SHAZ, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2012
- Commercial Space Management Company, Inc. v. The Boeing Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Larry McCall Cross-Appellant v. Gayle Franzen, Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
209 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.