Jones v. Wyeth Laboratories, Inc.
This text of 583 F.2d 1070 (Jones v. Wyeth Laboratories, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Ivo Jones commenced this action against four manufacturers of the swine flu vaccine, seeking damages for personal injuries allegedly caused by a swine flu innoeulation that had been administered to him. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 247b(k),1 the District Court permitted the United States to substitute itself as a defendant in the lawsuit. The court granted the government’s motion to dismiss Jones’s action based upon his failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
42 U.S.C. § 247b(k)(2)(A) provides that claims arising under the Swine Flu Act are governed by the procedures of the Federal Tort Claims Act. Under 28 U.S.C. § 2675(b) of the Tort Claims Act, a claimant must present his claim to the appropriate administrative agency before filing an action in the district court. The District Court found that Jones, admittedly, had not exhausted his administrative remedies. Thus, the court granted the government’s motion to dismiss.
The District Court rejected Jones’s contentions that: (1) the Swine Flu Act does not apply to negligence claims, and (2) the Act is unconstitutional. After a review of the briefs and the District Court’s opinion, we are satisfied that the court’s findings of fact are not clearly erroneous and that no error of law appears. We, thus, affirm on the basis of the District [1071]*1071Court’s opinion.2 See Ivo Jones v. Wyeth Laboratories, Inc., etc., et al., 457 F.Supp. 35 (W.D.Ark.1978).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
583 F.2d 1070, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-wyeth-laboratories-inc-ca8-1978.