Legal Opinion

Shorb by Shorb v. Airco, Inc.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 30, 1986No. Civ. A. 82-1983PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JOSEPH S. LORD, III, Senior District Judge.

Third-party defendants Sandoz, Inc. (“Sandoz”) and Hospal Medical Corporation (“Hospal”) have filed cross-motions for summary judgment. Before discussing these motions, I will briefly review the procedural history of this action.

I

Plaintiff Larry Shorb suffered severe brain damage when the tubing of a Monaghan series 300 D.O. anesthesia ventilator (“series 300 D.O. ventilator”) became disconnected during oral surgery. Plaintiffs sued Aireo, Inc. (“Aireo”), 1 which sold the allegedly defective ventilator. Aireo impleaded three parties: J.J.…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Griffith v. United Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  2. Ray v. Alad Corp.California Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Ramirez v. Amsted Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
  4. Atlantic Northern Airlines, Inc. v. SchwimmerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1953
  5. Dawejko v. Jorgensen Steel Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. TRACEY BY TRACEY v. Winchester Repeating Arms Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Keselyak v. Reach All, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  3. Conway v. White Trucks, a Div. of White Motor Corp.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1988
  4. LaFountain v. Webb Industries Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1991
  5. LaPollo Ex Rel. LaPollo v. General Electric Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1987

5 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