JONES v. ETHICON, INC.

Civil Action No. 2:12-cv-0443.

HOLLY JONES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ETHICON, INC., et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, Charleston Division.

December 21, 2016.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity - Product Liability
Nature of Suit: 365 Personal Inj. Prod. Liability
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Holly Jones, Plaintiff, represented by Amy Eskin , Levin Simes LLP, pro hac vice.

Holly Jones, Plaintiff, represented by Edward A. Wallace , Wexler Wallace LLP, Meghan E. McCormick , Levin Simes LLP, Michael H. Bowman , WEXLER WALLACE & Rachel Beth Abrams , Levin Simes LLP, pro hac vice.

Jason Jones, Plaintiff, represented by Amy Eskin , Levin Simes LLP, pro hac vice, Edward A. Wallace , Wexler Wallace LLP, Meghan E. McCormick , Levin Simes LLP, Michael H. Bowman , WEXLER WALLACE & Rachel Beth Abrams , Levin Simes LLP, pro hac vice.

Ethicon Inc, Defendant, represented by Andrew L. Goldman , GOLDMAN ISMAIL TOMASELLI BRENNAN & BAUM, Christy D. Jones , Butler Snow O'Mara Stevens Cannada, pro hac vice, David B. Thomas , Thomas Combs & Spann, Joe W. Tomaselli, Jr. , Fulbright & Jaworski, Shayna S. Cook , GOLDMAN ISMAIL TOMASELLI BRENNAN & BAUM, Tarek Ismail , Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott, Tracy J. Van Steenburgh , Halleland Lewis Nilan Sipkins & Johnson, P.A., Kari L. Sutherland , BUTLER SNOW, pro hac vice & William M. Gage , BUTLER SNOW.

Johnson & Johnson, Defendant, represented by Andrew L. Goldman , GOLDMAN ISMAIL TOMASELLI BRENNAN & BAUM, Christy D. Jones , Butler Snow O'Mara Stevens Cannada, pro hac vice, David B. Thomas , Thomas Combs & Spann, Joe W. Tomaselli, Jr. , Fulbright & Jaworski, Shayna S. Cook , GOLDMAN ISMAIL TOMASELLI BRENNAN & BAUM, Tarek Ismail , Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott, Tracy J. Van Steenburgh , Halleland Lewis Nilan Sipkins & Johnson, P.A., Kari L. Sutherland , BUTLER SNOW, pro hac vice & William M. Gage , BUTLER SNOW.


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment)

Pending before the court is the defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 92]. As set forth below, the defendants' Motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

I. Background...

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