§

T.W.M. v. American Medical Systems, Inc.

886 F. Supp. 842 (N.D. Fla. 1995)
T.W.M. v. American Medical Systems, Inc.

2 Citing cases

  1. Porter v. Ogden, Newell Welch

    241 F.3d 1334 (11th Cir. 2001)   Cited 71 times
    Declining to resolve whether a plaintiff must proffer evidence showing a reasonable basis for a punitive damages claim before pursing discovery in light of Fla. Stat. § 768.72

    Under Florida law, merely setting forth conclusory allegations in the complaint is insufficient to entitle a claimant to recover punitive damages. See T.W.M. v. American Medical Sys., Inc., 886 F.Supp. 842, 845 (N.D.Fla. 1995); Bankest Imports, Inc. v. ISCA Corp., 717 F.Supp. 1537, 1542-43 (S.D.Fla. 1989). Instead, a plaintiff must plead specific acts committed by a defendant.

  2. WILKINS v. Genzyme Corp.

    Civil Action 21-10023-DPW (D. Mass. Sep. 14, 2022)   Cited 1 times

    Although the complaint states Mr. Stanziano “was in privity with Genzyme throughout his treatment with his Genzyme case coordinator as well as being registered in the Genzyme sponsored Fabry Registry,” the complaint does not allege that he and Genzyme had a buyer-seller relationship. See id. (“A plaintiff who purchases a product, but does not buy it directly from the defendant, is not in privity with that defendant” (quoting T.W.M.v.Am. Med. Sys., Inc., 886 F.Supp. 842, 844 (N.D. Fla. 1995).); cf. id.