In Re" Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation

341 F. Supp. 2d 214, 2004 WL 2600005

Opinion

341 F.Supp.2d 214 (2004)

In re "AGENT ORANGE" PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION.
Joe Isaacson and Phillis Lisa Isaacson, Plaintiffs,
v.
Dow Chemical Company, et al., Defendants,
Daniel Raymond Stephenson, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Dow Chemical Company, et al., Defendants.

Nos. MDL 381, 98-CV-6383(JBW), 99-CV-3056(JBW).

United States District Court, E.D. New York.

November 16, 2004.

Gerson H. Smoger, Dallas, TX, Mark R. Cuker Williams, Cuker, Berezofsky, Cherry Hill, NJ, for Plaintiffs.

James L. Stengel, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP, John C. Sabetta, Seyfarth Shaw, LLP, William Andrew Krohley, Kelley, Drye & Warren, L.L.P., Michael M. Gordon, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, LLP, Myron Kalish, New York, NY, Steven R. Brock Rivkin Radler, LLP, Uniondale, NY, James E. Tyrrell, Jr., Latham & Watkins, LLP, Newark, NJ, Lawrence T. D'Aloise Clark, Gagliardi & Miller, P. C., White Plains, NY, for Defendants.

WEINSTEIN, District Judge.

No further arguments or papers are required for claims by United States veterans. Having studied the plaintiffs' papers seeking the setting aside of the judgment of dismissal of February 9, 2004, the court is prepared to decide the case. A court need not hear oral argument on a matter which can be fairly decided without such argument. See, e.g., Smith v. Texas, No. 04-5323, 2004 WL 2578461, at *1, ___ U.S. ___, 125 S.Ct. 400, ___ L.Ed.2d ___ (Nov. 15, 2004) ("We grant the petition for certiorari ... and reverse.").

SO ORDERED.