Gorman v. Abbott Laboratories
| Decision Date | 12 December 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-562-A,90-562-A |
| Citation | 599 A.2d 1364 |
| Parties | Nancy GORMAN v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES et al. ppeal. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Christine McBurney, Pawtucket, for plaintiff.
Thomas D. Gidley, Gordon Cleary, Edward L. Gnys, Jr., John M. Marks, Bruce G. Tucker, Paul E. Dwyer, Jr., Richard M. Borod, Providence, for defendants.
This case came before the court for oral argument December 2, 1991, pursuant to an order which had directed both parties to appear and show cause why their respective appeals should not be denied and dismissed. Defendants appeal from an order granting the plaintiff an extension of 120 days to transmit the record to this court following her filing of a notice of appeal. The plaintiff appeals from the granting of defendants' motion for summary judgment.
After hearing the arguments of counsel and examining the memoranda filed by the parties, we are of the opinion that the granting of the extension of time did not constitute an abuse of discretion. We further hold that the entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendants was correct as a matter of law. We are not willing to adopt the market-share doctrine which has been accepted in the State of California in Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc., 26 Cal.3d 588, 163 Cal.Rptr. 132, 607 P.2d 924 (1980). See also D. Fischer, Products Liability--An Analysis of Market Share Liability, 34 Vand.L.Rev. 1623 (1982). We are of the opinion that the establishment of liability requires the identification of the specific defendant responsible for the injury.
Consequently the appeals of both parties are denied and dismissed. The summary judgment entered in the Superior Court is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Philadelphia v. Lead Industries Ass'n, Inc.
...law.13 The Rhode Island, Illinois, Iowa and Missouri Supreme Courts have rejected market share liability. See Gorman v. Abbott Lab., 599 A.2d 1364 (R.I.1991); Smith v. Eli Lilly & Co., 137 Ill.2d 222, 148 Ill.Dec. 22, 560 N.E.2d 324 (1990); Mulcahy v. Eli Lilly & Co., 386 N.W.2d 67 (Iowa 19......
-
State v. Lead Industries, Ass'n, Inc.
...in any Rhode Island property. To support their motion, defendants relied primarily on this Court's decision in Gorman v. Abbott Laboratories, 599 A.2d 1364, 1364 (R.I.1991) (mem.), in which this Court rejected the market-share theory of products liability that the California Supreme Court h......
-
Sutowski v. Eli Lilly & Co.
...the District of Columbia); Mizell v. Eli Lilly & Co. (D.S.C.1981), 526 F.Supp. 589 (applying South Carolina law); Gorman v. Abbott Laboratories (R.I.1991), 599 A.2d 1364; Smith v. Eli Lilly & Co. (1990), 137 Ill.2d 222, 148 Ill.Dec. 22, 560 N.E.2d 324; Mulcahy v. Eli Lilly & Co. (Iowa 1986)......
-
Rhode Island v. Atl. Richfield Co.
...Island Supreme Court has on occasion declined to shift the apportionment burden. See, e.g., Almonte, 46 A.3d at 23–28 ; Gorman v. Abbott Labs., 599 A.2d 1364, 1364 (1991). But these cases are readily distinguishable. In Almonte, for example, the court refused to shift the burden of proving ......
-
Diethylstilbestrol and the Birth of Market-Share Liability
...67 (Iowa 1986) (en banc)), Missouri (Zaft v. Eli Lilly & Co., 676 S.W.2d 241 (Mo. 1984) (en banc)), Rhode Island (Gorman v. Abbott Labs., 599 A.2d 1364 (R.I. 1991)), and Illinois (Smith v. Eli Lilly & Co., 560 N.E.2d 324 (Ill. 1990)) all rejected market-share liability in DES cases. Federal......