Bailey v. AH ROBINS CO., INC.

N.D. New York

Bailey v. AH ROBINS CO., INC.

560 F. Supp. 833, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17961

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. New York

DecidedApril 5, 1983

Docket81-CV-605

StatusPublished

This text of 560 F. Supp. 833 (Bailey v. AH ROBINS CO., INC.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bailey v. AH ROBINS CO., INC., 560 F. Supp. 833, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17961 (N.D.N.Y. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

McCURN, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment based on the alleged running of the statute of limitations. See N.Y.Civ.Prac. § 214(5). Here, plaintiff is suing the defendant, the manufacturer of an IUD called the Daikon Shield, for the injuries which she allegedly suffered as a result of the defects in a Daikon Shield which was inserted in her by her physician. This Court has today held in a companion case that, absent proof in the record that injury to the plaintiff occurred upon insertion of the device, the Court would date the injury as of the onset of infection, allegedly caused by the device. See Kristeller v. A.H. Robins, 560 F.Supp. 831 (N.D.N.Y.1983). Plaintiff Bailey contracted a pelvic inflammatory disease in 1979 and filed suit two years later. This suit, therefore, appears to have been timely filed.

Accordingly, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

McCURN, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment based on the alleged running of the statute of limitations. See N.Y.Civ.Prac. § 214(5). Here, plaintiff is suing the defendant, the manufacturer of an IUD called the Daikon Shield, for the injuries which she allegedly suffered as a result of the defects in a Daikon Shield which was inserted in her by her physician. This Court has today held in a companion case that, absent proof in the record that injury to the plaintiff occurred upon insertion of the device, the Court would date the injury as of the onset of infection, allegedly caused by the device. See Kristeller v. A.H. Robins, 560 F.Supp. 831 (N.D.N.Y.1983). Plaintiff Bailey contracted a pelvic inflammatory disease in 1979 and filed suit two years later. This suit, therefore, appears to have been timely filed.

Accordingly, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

560 F. Supp. 833, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17961, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bailey-v-ah-robins-co-inc-nynd-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack