Legal Opinion
Howard v. Zimmer, Inc.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided March 19, 2013No. 110,857PublishedCited by 55 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WATT, J.;
{ 1 The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (Tenth Circuit) certified a single question of first impression to this Court under the Revised Uniform Certifica- *465§ tion of Questions of Law Act, 20 0.S8.2011 1601, et seq. We are not asked whether the negligence claim is preempted by federal law as the Tenth Cireuit has resolved that preemption analysis has no place in the cause. Rather, we were requested to address a related, first impression question.1 The reformulated, first impression question we address is dispositive. It asks:
"Whether 21 U.S.C. 3872 of the Federal…
2Cases cited65 opinions
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs' Legal CommitteeSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLCSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Bausch v. Stryker Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- ODOM v. PENSKE TRUCK LEASING CO.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2018
- Coleman v. Medtronic, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2014
- Reece v. AES CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2016
- Martinez v. Angel Exploration, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015
- SILOAM SPRINGS HOTEL, LLC v. CENTURY SURETY COMPANYSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.