Hicks v. Charles Pfizer & Co.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
466 F.Supp.2d 799 (2005)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Karen Hicks (plaintiff) received a polio vaccine in 1962, when she was about five years old. The vaccine was administered as part of a popular, respected public health campaign. About 39 years later, Hicks was diagnosed with two malignant brain tumors. Hicks brought a products liability suit against Charles Pfizer & Co. (Pfizer) (defendant), alleging that the vaccine caused her tumors and that Pfizer manufactured the vaccine. At trial, Hicks sought to introduce four 1962 newspaper articles from different authors and different newspapers, each of which linked Pfizer to the vaccine Hicks received. Hicks was unable to produce any other evidence linking Pfizer to the vaccine. Pfizer objected to the introduction of the articles on hearsay grounds and moved for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Crone, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.