Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “ROACH v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES”
Jelinek v. Abbott Laboratoriespublic domain
[Cite as Jelinek v. Abbott Laboratories, 2019-Ohio-3860.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT David A. Jelinek, : Plaintiff-Appellant, : v. : No. 17AP-576 (C.P.C. No. 99CVH-7505) Abbott Laboratories,
Clark v. Abbott Laboratoriespublic domain
Boomer, J. (dissenting). I agree with the opinion of Justice Sullivan in Singer v Lilly & Co. (153 AD2d 210). Under the revival provision of the "Toxic Torts” statute (see, L 1986, ch 682, § 4), the commencement of an action on or before July 30, 1987 is a condition precedent to the revival of an action previously barred by the Statute of Limitations. By Laws of 1986 (ch 682), the Legislature
Kensinger v. Abbott Laboratoriespublic domain
171 Cal.App.3d 376 (1985) 217 Cal. Rptr. 313 GEORGIANN KENSINGER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES et al., Defendants and Respondents. Docket No. A021931. Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division One. August 22, 1985. *379 COUNSEL Hersh & Hersh, Harry A. Allen, LeR
Martin v. Abbott Laboratoriespublic domain
102 Wn.2d 581 (1984) 689 P.2d 368 RITA RENE MARTIN, ET AL, Appellants, v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, ET AL, Respondents. No. 49359-6. The Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc. October 4, 1984. *582 Manza, Moceri, Gustafson & Messina, P.S., by Michael S. Manza, John S. Glassman, and John L. M
Sindell v. Abbott Laboratoriespublic domain
26 Cal.3d 588 (1980) 607 P.2d 924 163 Cal. Rptr. 132 JUDITH SINDELL, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES et al., Defendants and Respondents. MAUREEN ROGERS, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. REXALL DRUG COMPANY et al., Defendants and Respondents. Docket No. L.A. 31063. Supreme Court of California. March 20, 1980.
Gravis v. Abbott Laboratoriespublic domain
462 S.W.2d 410 (1970) C. K. GRAVIS, Jr., et ux., Appellants, v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES et al., Appellees. No. 546. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Corpus Christi. December 30, 1970. Two Motions for Rehearing Denied January 28, 1971. *411 Sidney P. Chandler, Corpus Christi, for appellants. Allison, Maddin, Wh
Brown v. Superior Courtpublic domain
44 Cal.3d 1049 (1988) 751 P.2d 470 245 Cal. Rptr. 412 JAN BROWN et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Respondent; ABBOTT LABORATORIES et al., Real Parties in Interest. [And 68 other cases.][*] Docket No. S.F. 25059. Supreme Court of California. March 31, 1988.
Kale Flagg v. Denise Elliotpublic domain
W. EUGENE DAVIS, Circuit Judge: We took this case en banc to decide whether the district court erred by dis.missing the non-diverse defendants as improperly joined and exercising diversity jurisdiction over the remaining diverse defendants. We conclude that the district court did not err by concluding that the plaintiff had improperly joined the non-diverse defendants because the plaintiff had not exhausted his clai
Eastern Maine Medical Center v. Walgreen Co.public domain
MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Reporter of Decisions Decision: 2025 ME 10 Docket: BCD-23-73 Argued: March 7, 2024 Decided: February 6, 2025 Panel: STANFILL, C.J., and MEAD, HORTON, CONNORS, LAWRENCE, and DOUGLAS, JJ. EASTERN MAINE MEDICAL CENTER et al. v. WALGREEN CO. et al. HORTON, J. [¶1] Eastern Maine Medica
Roty v. Battelle Mem. Inst.public domain
[Cite as Roty v. Battelle Mem. Inst., 2020-Ohio-4389.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Ann Roty et al., : Plaintiffs-Appellants, : No. 18AP-956 v. : (C.P.C. No. 14CV-2502) Battelle Memorial Institute et a
John D. Carson v. Monsanto Companypublic domain
USCA11 Case: 21-10994 Document: 163-1 Date Filed: 07/10/2023 Page: 1 of 22 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-10994 ____________________ JOHN D. CARSON,
State v. Astra Zeneca ABpublic domain
McCLENDON, J. *41The State of Louisiana appeals a judgment that sustained peremptory exceptions raising the objections of no cause of action and no right of action in favor of a drug manufacturer, dismissing the State's claims against the manufacturer with prejudice. For the reasons that follow, we reverse. FACTS AND PROCE
Seattle Pacific University v. Robert Fergusonpublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SEATTLE PACIFIC UNIVERSITY, No. 22-35986 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 3:22-cv-05540- RJB ROBERT FERGUSON, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Washington,
Seattle Pacific University v. Robert Fergusonpublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SEATTLE PACIFIC UNIVERSITY, No. 22-35986 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 3:22-cv-05540- RJB ROBERT FERGUSON, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Washington,
Kevin Cooper v. Gavin Newsompublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KEVIN COOPER; ALBERT No. 18-16547 GREENWOOD BROWN; RONALD LEE DEERE; ROBERT G. FAIRBANK; D.C. Nos. ANTHONY J. SULLY, 3:06-cv-00219-RS Plaintiffs-Appellees, 3:06-cv-00926-RS v. ORDER GAVIN NEWSOM; SCOTT KERNAN, Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation;
MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Reporter of Decisions Decision: 2021 ME 24 Docket: BCD-20-164 Argued: February 11, 2021 Decided: April 27, 2021 Panel: MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, HUMPHREY, and CONNORS, JJ. MERIDIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, LLC, et al. v. EPIX THERAPEUTICS, INC., et al. CONNORS, J. [¶1] In this business dispute asserting various tort claims, Ken
MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Reporter of Decisions Decision: 2021 ME 24 Docket: BCD-20-164 Argued: February 11, 2021 Decided: April 27, 2021 Panel: MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, HUMPHREY, and CONNORS, JJ. MERIDIAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, LLC, et al. v. EPIX THERAPEUTICS, INC., et al. CONNORS, J. [¶1] In this business dispute asserting various tort claims, Ken
Commonwealth v. Gatlospublic domain
OPINION BY OLSON, J.: Appellant, Danielle Dickson Gatlos, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered June 4, 2012, committing her to an aggregate sentence of eight to 23 months’ incarceration followed by three years’ probation for convictions of driving under the influence (“DUI”) of alcohol or controlled substance,1 aggravated assault by vehicle while DUI,2
Stawski Distributing Co., Inc. v. Browary Zywiec S.A., Doing Business as Zywiec Breweries, LLCpublic domain
EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge. The contract between Stawski, a distributor of beer, and Zywiec, a brewer, provides that any dispute will be arbitrated in Poland (where Zywiec’s brewery is located) under Polish law. When Zywiec notified Stawski that it would sell beer in Illinois through someone else, Stawski filed this suit in federal court under the diversity jurisdiction, see 2
CENTOCOR, INC. v. Hamiltonpublic domain
310 S.W.3d 476 (2010) CENTOCOR, INC., Appellant, v. Patricia HAMILTON, Thomas Hamilton, and Michael G. Bullen, M.D., Appellees. No. 13-07-00301-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Corpus Christi-Edinburg. March 4, 2010. *480 Gene M. Williams, Manuel Lopez, Kathleen A. Frazier, Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P., Daniel W. Davis, Robert M