IN RE ABBOTT LABORATORIES

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

Nos. 94-30279, 94-30280.

Attorney(S)

William R. D'Armond, Kean, Miller, Hawthorne, D'Armond, McCowan Jarman, Baton Rouge, LA, for Abbott. Phillip A. Wittmann, John M. Landis, Stone, Pigman, Walther, Wittmann Hutchinson, New Orleans, LA, Douglas D. Broadwater, Max R. Shulman, Cravath, Swaine Moore, New York City, for Bristol-Meyers and Mead Johnson Co. Patrick W. Pendley, Plaquemine, LA, Daniel E. Gustafson, Heins Mills Olsen, Minneapolis, MN, Daniel A. Small, Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld Toll, Washington, DC, for appellees.

Judges

Patrick Errol Higginbotham

Acts

Judiciary And Judicial Procedure — District Courts; Jurisdiction — Jurisdiction And Venue — Supplemental Jurisdiction

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

IN RE ABBOTT LABORATORIES, BRISTOL-MEYERS SQUIBB COMPANY, INC., AND MEAD JOHNSON COMPANY, PETITIONERS. ROBIN FREE AND RENEE FREE, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, BRISTOL-MEYERS SQUIBB COMPANY, INC., AND MEAD JOHNSON COMPANY, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

PER CURIAM:

Treating the Suggestions for Rehearing En Banc as Petitions for Panel Rehearing, the Petitions for Panel Rehearing are DENIED. No member of the panel nor Judge in regular active service of the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc (FRAP and Local Rule 35), the Suggestions for Rehearing En Banc are DENIED.

We express no opinion regarding class certification or the exercise by the district court of discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 to decline supplemental jurisdiction should a more well developed record warrant its doing so. We decline to further explore now on this record the complexities of declining to exercise jurisdiction under § 1367.

IN RE ABBOTT LABORATORIES, BRISTOL-MEYERS SQUIBB COMPANY, INC., AND MEAD JOHNSON COMPANY, PETITIONERS. ROBIN FREE AND RENEE FREE, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, BRISTOL-MEYERS SQUIBB COMPANY, INC., AND MEAD JOHNSON COMPANY, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Comments