From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Murphy v. Aventis Pasteur, Inc.

United States District Court, N.D. Georgia
Feb 26, 2003
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:02-CV-2257-CAP (N.D. Ga. Feb. 26, 2003)

Summary

In Murphy v. Aventis Pasteur, Inc., 270 F.Supp.2d 1368 (N.D.Ga. 2003), the district court dismissed the plaintiff's complaint where the plaintiff alleged that Eli Lilly "failed to warn consumers of the alleged dangers of thimerosal."

Summary of this case from Doe v. Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc.

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:02-CV-2257-CAP

February 26, 2003


ORDER


By an order of this court dated February 24, 2003, this court granted several motions to dismiss. As a consequence of that order several pending motions became moot. Accordingly, the ADA'S motion to disqualify [Doc. No. 19-1]; the ADA's motion to strike or disregard (Doc. No. 20-1 and 20-2]; the plaintiff's motion for leave to file [Doc. No. 23-1]; and the plaintiff's motion to strike [Doc. No. 44-1] are all DENIED AS MOOT.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Murphy v. Aventis Pasteur, Inc.

United States District Court, N.D. Georgia
Feb 26, 2003
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:02-CV-2257-CAP (N.D. Ga. Feb. 26, 2003)

In Murphy v. Aventis Pasteur, Inc., 270 F.Supp.2d 1368 (N.D.Ga. 2003), the district court dismissed the plaintiff's complaint where the plaintiff alleged that Eli Lilly "failed to warn consumers of the alleged dangers of thimerosal."

Summary of this case from Doe v. Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc.

dismissing the plaintiffs' negligent-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim against Eli Lilly because it had already dismissed the plaintiffs' negligent-failure-to-warn claim

Summary of this case from Doe v. Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc.
Case details for

Murphy v. Aventis Pasteur, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:NATALIE MELECK MURPHY, as Next Friend of JOSHUA MURPHY, Plaintiff, v…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Georgia

Date published: Feb 26, 2003

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:02-CV-2257-CAP (N.D. Ga. Feb. 26, 2003)

Citing Cases

Doe v. Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc.

Further supporting the Court's conclusion that Eli Lilly does not owe a duty to Plaintiffs is the opinion of…

Zeltner v. STS Property Investments, LLC

Likewise, the rule that resident defendants may not remove cases otherwise within federal jurisdiction, known…