In Re Rely Tampon Products Liability Litigation

533 F. Supp. 1346, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11053
CourtUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
DecidedMarch 9, 1982
Docket497
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 533 F. Supp. 1346 (In Re Rely Tampon Products Liability Litigation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Rely Tampon Products Liability Litigation, 533 F. Supp. 1346, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11053 (jpml 1982).

Opinion

ORDER DENYING TRANSFER

PER CURIAM.

Presently before the Panel are two motions, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, filed by two groups of plaintiffs in actions in this docket, to centralize in a single district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings the 92 actions 1 listed on the attached Schedule A.

*1347 On the basis of the papers filed and the hearing held, we find that Section 1407 transfer would neither serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses nor further the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. Although we recognize that the actions in this litigation involve some common questions of fact, we are not persuaded that these common questions of fact will predominate over individual questions of fact present in each action. Furthermore, we note that 1) discovery in many actions in this docket is well advanced; and 2) pretrial proceedings have been completed and trial is imminent in at least two actions. Under these circumstances, we cannot conclude that centralization of the actions in this litigation under Section 1407 will further the purposes of the statute. See In re Asbestos and Asbestos Insulation Material Products Liability Litigation, 431 F.Supp. 906, 910 (J.P.M.L.1977).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motions for transfer pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 be, and the same hereby are, DENIED.

SCHEDULE A

Northern District of Alabama

Deborah Louise Parker v. Proctor & Gamble, et al., C.A. No. CV-80-HM-1585-S

Theresa J. Boney v. Proctor & Gamble, et al., C.A. No. CV-81-C-1062-S

Eastern District of Arkansas

Mike Ford, etc. v. Proctor & Gamble Co., C.A. No. LR-C-81-493

Northern District of California

Carol A. Thompson, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al., C.A. No. C-80-3711SAW

District of Colorado

Deletha Dawn Lampshire, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al., C.A. No. 80-1567

District of Connecticut

Paula Doucette v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., C.A. No. H-81-406

Middle District of Florida

Paula Beaudoin, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co., et al., C.A. No. 80- 575-ORL-CIV-Y

Shannon M. Keeney, et a1. v. The Proctor Distributing Co., C.A. No. 80-597-ORL-CIV-Y

Tammy Carr v. International Playtex Inc., et al., C.A. No. 80-611-ORL-CIV-R

Sandra J. Nester, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co., C.A. No. 81-160-CIV-T—H

Northern District of Georgia

Robert A. Ellis, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., C.A. No. C81-794-A

Southern District of Illinois

Charles File, Adm. v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., C.A. No. 81-3213

Central District of Illinois

George Thomas Dorris, etc., et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al., C.A. No. 81- 2180

Northern District of Iowa

Michael L. Kehm, Adm. v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al., C.A. No. C80-119

Nancy C. Vohs v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al., C.A. No. C81-4069

District of Kansas

Kathleen E. McLaughlin v. The Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co., et al., C.A. No. 80-4265

Vickie G. Helton v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1116

*1348 Barbara J. Ivey v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co., et al., C.A. No. 81— 1037

Judy M. Mitchell v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co., et al., C.A. No. 81— 1038

Gloria L. DeRoulet v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1039

Cynthia Sue Souter v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1118

Anne E. Somer v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1185

Cynthia A. Butler v. The Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1184

Carolyn K. McKinsey v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-4123

Janet L. Matney v. Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1263

Sarah P. Hughes v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1359

Dana L. Lewis v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co., et al., C.A. No. 81— 1357

Deborah L. Tilghman v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1358

Western District of Kentucky

Brenda Coreau v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., C.A. No. C81-0072P(J)

Karen McGregor v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., C.A. No. 81-0076-P(J)

Eastern District of Louisiana

Cathy Baudry v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1827

Peggy Burns v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1863

Herman J. Byrnes, etc. v. The Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-2413

Eastern District of Michigan

Carol Anne Keene v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-10060-NI

Western District of Missouri

Larry D. Clark v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al., C.A. No. 80-0952-CV-W-5

Mary Christine Cervantes v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-0488-CV-W—5

Athalee Kay Manley v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al., C.A. No. 80-0907-CV-W-5

Sharon Davis v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-0314-CV-W-5

Debra Ann Bailey, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al., C.A. No. 80-0910-CV-W-5

Sherrie D. Biggs v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al., C.A. No. 81— 0047-W — 5

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

Related

Harding v. Tambrands Inc.
165 F.R.D. 623 (D. Kansas, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
533 F. Supp. 1346, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11053, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-rely-tampon-products-liability-litigation-jpml-1982.