Home | Publish your case | Other publications

Volume 24, No. 10
December 2005

Court Documents

Documents can be downloaded from the Exchange.

Documents $50

• Anderson v. Kohler Co., p. 200 (plaintiffs’ appellate brief in this case holding the admission of a joking comment about carbon monoxide poisoning was unduly prejudicial in a suit over deaths from carbon monoxide poisoning). No. PL1029.

• Chamberlan v. Ford Motor Co., p. 200 (plaintiffs’ brief opposing dismissal in a case holding federal law does not preempt a claim alleging a car manufacturer failed to disclose problems with its vehicles’ intake manifolds). No. PL994.

• Leach v. DuPont, p. 200 (the court’s order approving the settlement of a class action by residents living near a DuPont plant who alleged high concentrations of PFOA were found in the communities’ public water districts and private wells). No. PL1030.

• Marroquin v. Ford Motor Co., p. 194 (the charge of the court in a case alleging that an SUV had a defective seat restraint and inadequate window glazing). No. PL1036.

• Miller v. Castellini Co., p. 201 (plaintiffs’ complaint in a case alleging food suppliers had provided a restaurant with contaminated green onions). No. PL973.

• Payan v. Continental Tire N. Am., Inc., p. 195 (plaintiffs’ response to defendant’s motion to dismiss in a case holding that a person who performed repairs on an allegedly defective tire that later detreaded was not an indispensable party whose absence required dismissal). No. PL1037.

• Sutton v. St. Jude Med. S.C., Inc., p. 193 (plaintiffs’ appellate brief in a case in which the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an increased risk of cardiac complications from an allegedly defective implant device that was sufficient to require medical monitoring qualified as an injury in fact). No. PL1038.

• Zenaida-Garcia v. Recovery Sys. Tech., Inc., p. 200 (plaintiff’s appellate brief arguing Washington’s 12-year repose statute, rather than Oregon’s eight-year statute, governs a suit against a Washington manufacturer whose product allegedly caused fatal injuries to an Oregon worker). No. PL1032.

• Witczak v. Pfizer, Inc., p. 200 (plaintiff’s brief in a case holding that federal law does not preempt a state law claim alleging that an antidepressant manufacturer failed to warn of the alleged suicide risk associated with the medication). No. PL1031.

Document Sets $95

• Stein v. Bayer Corp., p. 190 (plaintiffs’ brief in support of their motion for remand and reply brief in a case holding that a defendant was not entitled to equitable extension of the one-year bar against removal where defendant could have timely determined the value of the case but failed to do so). No. PL1039.