In Re Factor VIII or IX Concentrate Blood Products Litigation
District Court, N.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
GRADY, District Judge.
Before the court is defendant National Hemophilia Foundation’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to F.R.C.P. 56(b), or in the alternative, for summary determination of major issues pursuant to F.R.C.P. 56(d). For the reasons stated below, the motion is denied.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs in this multidistriet litigation are hemophiliacs and the personal representatives of deceased hemophiliacs who used certain blood products known as “factor concentrates” to treat their hemophilia and, as a result, became infected with the HIV virus. The defendant National…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Connick Ex Rel. Parish of Orleans v. MyersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. ButtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Thornhill v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Reynolds v. MurphyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2006
- Imperial Apparel, Ltd. v. Cosmo's Designer Direct, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 2008
- United States Securities & Exchange Commission v. Gun Soo Oh ParkDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2000
- Bailey v. N.D.O.C.District Court, D. Nevada · 2023
- Ernest Reynolds III v. Michael Murphy A/K/A and F/K/A John Michael Murphy, and Phillips Investment Resources, L.L.C., Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2006
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.