Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Tracy Lynn HOWARD, Plaintiff-Appellant v. ARROW INTERNATIONAL INC., Defendant-Appellee.

PER CURIAM:[fn*] [fn*] Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed for the following reasons:

1. This court relies upon the recitation in the record that no defendant remains in the case other than Arrow International to conclude that we have jurisdiction of the appeal from a final judgment dismissing the claims against Arrow.
2. Testimony that a product could have been defective will not support a finding that it was defective.
3. Appellant states the appeal by saying that the fact that the catheter broke with Doctor Myers' statement (which was that the break was likely caused by excessive force in its removal, although a defect was a possibility), raises an issue of material fact. A possibility that a defect existed, that could possibly have caused the product to break, presents no factual issue for appellant's claim.

AFFIRMED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HOWARD v. ARROW INTERNATIONAL
(Oct 1, 2008)