Mack v. Stryker Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
748 F.3d 845 (2014)
- Written by Mary Phelan D'Isa, JD
Facts
Carol Mack (plaintiff) sued Stryker Corporation (defendant), the manufacturer of an implantable pain pump, for products liability when Mack developed chondrolysis after one of Stryker’s pain pumps was implanted in her during her arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Mack alleged in part that Stryker was liable on a strict-liability design-defect and failure-to-warn theory. The district court granted summary judgment for Stryker after finding that, based on the medical literature existing at the time of Mack’s surgery, it was not reasonably foreseeable to Stryker that the use of its pain pump in an articular joint would lead to joint damage like chondrolysis. Mack appealed and argued that the district court improperly disregarded Mack’s expert and the medical literature upon which the expert relied as well as the fact that the Food and Drug Administration had twice previously denied Stryker approval for use of its pain pumps in articular spaces.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Smith, J.)
Dissent (Bye, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 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.
