Evans v. Lederle Laboratories Evans v. Lederle Laboratories

Evans v. Lederle Laboratories

167 F.3d 1106, 1999.C07.42056

    • 4,00 kr
    • 4,00 kr

Publisher Description

Argued September 25, 1998 During the first year of her life, Jessica Evans received three doses of a diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus (DPT) vaccine manufactured by Lederle and administered by Sharma, a physician, at the Link Clinic. Several years later, Jessica's mother, Kathleen Evans, filed suit on her behalf seeking to recover damages for injuries allegedly caused by the vaccine. A confusing chronology of litigation ensued culminating in this appeal. On August 14, 1985, Evans sued the Link Clinic and Sharma in state court. That action was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice to make way for a diversity action filed in the district court on June 8, 1990, naming as defendants Lederle, the Link Clinic and Sharma. On October 1, 1990, Evans filed suit in the Court of Claims seeking an award under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (the ""Vaccine Act""), 42 U.S.C. sec. 300aa-1 et seq. That filing necessitated the voluntary dismissal of the pending diversity action. When the Court of Claims subsequently dismissed the Vaccine Act claim with prejudice, Evans went back to the district court and refiled the diversity action on February 28, 1995. The Link Clinic and Sharma moved to dismiss the claims against them pursuant to the Illinois saving statute which allows a plaintiff just one opportunity to refile an action that has been voluntarily dismissed. See 735 ILCS 5/13-217. The magistrate Judge determined that the Illinois rule was preempted by the Vaccine Act and recommended that Evans be allowed to proceed with her action. But the district court rejected the magistrate Judge's recommendation on the ground that the Illinois rule was not preempted. Applying the Illinois rule, the court dismissed the Link Clinic and Sharma from the case and subsequently granted Lederle's motion for judgment on the pleadings. We affirm.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1999
3 February
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
18
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
62.5
KB
Carter v. Chicago Police Officer M.L. Moore Carter v. Chicago Police Officer M.L. Moore
1998
United States v. Randle United States v. Randle
2003
United States v. Luckett United States v. Luckett
1995
Gadson v. Bop Warden Class of Chicago M.C.C Gadson v. Bop Warden Class of Chicago M.C.C
1995
Hart v. Schering-Plough Corporation Hart v. Schering-Plough Corporation
2001
In re Dorner In re Dorner
2003