1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. LAURIS v. NOVARTIS AG
 

LAURIS v. NOVARTIS AG

Case No. 1-16-cv-00393-SEH.

KRISTI LAURIS, Individually and as Successor In Interest to the Estate of DAINIS LAURIS; KRISTI LAURIS as Guardian Ad Litem for L.L.; and TAYLOR LAURIS, Plaintiffs, v. NOVARTIS AG, a Global Healthcare Company; NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. California.

December 29, 2017.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity - Wrongful Death
Nature of Suit: 367 Personal Injury: Health Care / Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability
Source: PACER

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Kristi Lauris, Individually and as Successor in Interest to the Estate of Dainis Lauris, Plaintiff, represented by Greg G. Gutzler , Elias Gutzler Spicer LLC, pro hac vice, Richard M. Elias , Elias Gutzler Spicer LLC, pro hac vice, Tamara Spicer , Elias Gutzler Spicer LLC, Brande Lynn Gustafson , Weakley & Arendt, LLP & James D. Weakley , Weakley & Arendt, LLP.

L. L., guardian ad litem Kristi Lauris, Plaintiff, represented by James D. Weakley , Weakley & Arendt, LLP, Brande Lynn Gustafson , Weakley & Arendt, LLP & Tamara Spicer , Elias Gutzler Spicer LLC.

Taylor Lauris, guardian ad litem Kristi Lauris, Plaintiff, represented by Greg G. Gutzler , Elias Gutzler Spicer LLC, pro hac vice, James D. Weakley , Weakley & Arendt, LLP, Richard M. Elias , Elias Gutzler Spicer LLC, pro hac vice, Tamara Spicer , Elias Gutzler Spicer LLC & Brande Lynn Gustafson , Weakley & Arendt, LLP.

Novartis AG, a Global Healthcare Company, Defendant, represented by Erin M. Bosman , Morrison & Foerster LLP & Julie Yongsun Park , Morrison & Foerster, LLP.

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant, represented by Andrew L. Reissaus , Hollingsworth LLP, Robert Eric Johnston , Hollingsworth LLP & Sandra Edwards , Farella Braun and Martel LLP.

ORDER

On December 22, 2017, Plaintiffs filed Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion and Motion to Permit Contemporaneous Video Transmission Under FRCP 43(a) ("Motion to Permit Video Transmission").1

In the interest of facilitating address and resolution of issues presented by the...

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