Scholl v. LEDERLE LABORATORIES DIVISION
684 F. Supp. 246
District Court, D. Arizona·Decided November 10, 1987·No. CIV 85-409 TUC-RMB·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
The Court, having read all the cases submitted by counsel, finds the reasoning most persuasive in Patten v. Lederle Laboratories, 655 F.Supp. 745 (D.Utah, 1987).
Neither the statute, congressional intent, or logic mandate a holding that the federal government has preempted state tort law in this area.
IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants’ Motions For Partial Summary Judgment are DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Scholl v. LEDERLE LABORATORIES DIVISION, 684 F. Supp. 246 (D. Ariz. 1987).
684 F. Supp. 246 (Scholl v. LEDERLE LABORATORIES DIVISION) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Tarallo v. Searle Pharmaceutical, Inc.
704 F. Supp. 653 (D. South Carolina, 1988)
Abbott v. American Cyanamid Co.
844 F.2d 1108 (Fourth Circuit, 1988)
Abbot v. American Cyanamid Co.
844 F.2d 1108 (Fourth Circuit, 1988)