Rogers v. Miles Laboratories, Inc.
Washington Supreme Court
802 P.2d 1346 (1991)
- Written by Emily Laird, JD
Facts
Jeremy Rogers was born in 1980 with severe type B hemophilia. To control spontaneous hemorrhaging, Jeremy received approximately weekly infusions of factor IX clotting concentrate. Clotting concentrates were only able to be tested for the presence of HIV beginning in April 1985. Jeremy had used clotting concentrates since birth. In 1985 Jeremy tested positive for the presence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). In 1988 Jeremy was diagnosed with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). On behalf of herself and as Jeremy’s guardian ad litem, Jeremy’s mother, Kimberly Rogers (plaintiff), filed negligence and strict-liability actions in federal court against Miles Laboratories and Baxter Healthcare (collectively, the health companies) (defendants). The health companies moved for partial summary judgment on Rogers’s strict-liability claims. The district court granted the health companies’ motion. Rogers filed a motion for reconsideration, seeking a stay of the court’s order and requesting certification on the strict-liability issue. The district court entered an order to stay its dismissal of Rogers’s strict-liability claim. The district court certified to the state supreme court the issue of whether Washington law allowed strict liability for Rogers’s claim.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Callow, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
