1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.2d
  4. 440 F.Supp.2d
  5. 440 F.Supp.2d 465 (2006)
 

DOE v. ORTHO-CLINICAL DIAGNOSTICS, INC.

No. 1:03CV00669.

440 F.Supp.2d 465 (2006)

John and Jane DOE 2, Individually, and as Guardians ad Litem, of Minor Child Doe 2, Plaintiffs, v. ORTHO-CLINICAL DIAGNOSTICS, INC., Defendant.

United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina.

July 6, 2006.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Jean Sutton Martin, William Marc Graham, Wallace and Graham, P.A., Salisbury, NC, for Plaintiffs.

Charles Q. Socha, Socha Perczak Setter & Anderson, P.C., Denver, CO, David N. Allen, John E. Grupp, Parker, Poe, Adams & Bernstein, LLP, Charlotte, NC, Robert C. Tucker, Tucker, Ellis & West, LLP, Cleveland, OH, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BEATY, District Judge.

Plaintiffs John and Jane Doe 2 ("Plaintiffs") have initiated this lawsuit based upon their contention that the thimerosal in Defendant Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics. Inc.'s ("Ortho-Clinical" or "Defendant") biologic product RhoGAM caused their child's autism. This matter is presently before the Court on three motions: Defendant's Motion to Exclude All Testimony...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases