Oxendine v. Merck & Co.
District Court, D. Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
DAVIS, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
As the gravamen of their principal claims in these cases, plaintiffs allege that their minor children suffered an increased risk of developmental harms and specifically, autism, which were proximately caused by the administration of various childhood vaccines containing the preservative thim-erosal, the composition of which contains mercury. It has recently been reported that in the last two years more than 4000 such lawsuits have been filed in state and federal courts. See Paul Hamper, Plaintiff Parents Rip Shield for Vaccine Makers; Suits…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Wilson v. Republic Iron & Steel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Pullman Co. v. JenkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Patricia J. Mayes v. Stanley Rapoport Judith Rapoport David Key, D/B/A Key Coffee Roasters, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1999
- Mildred MARSHALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MANVILLE SALES CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee, and Robert L. Mason, DefendantCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1993
- Mulcahey v. Columbia Organic Chemicals Company, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Shadie Ex Rel. Shadie v. Aventis Pasteur, Inc.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2003
- Oxendine v. Merck and Co., Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2002
- Billie v. VallanceDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2021
- John Doe 305 v. Richter, Jr.District Court, D. South Carolina · 2023
- Kickin Chicken LLC v. TFD IncDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2022
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.