§Why CasetextPricing

Osborn v. Boston Scientific Corporation

MOTION

31 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 235,819 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

  2. Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation

    497 U.S. 871 (1990)   Cited 9,516 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to admit affidavits in support of standing when filed after summary judgment briefing and hearing were complete

  3. Skotak v. Tenneco Resins, Inc.

    953 F.2d 909 (5th Cir. 1992)   Cited 2,238 times
    Declining to consider articles attached to a prior pleading when the articles were not referenced in a summary judgment response

  4. American Tobacco Co. Inc. v. Grinnell

    951 S.W.2d 420 (Tex. 1997)   Cited 1,111 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Texas law does not recognize claims based on a duty to act to prevent risk once prior conduct is found to be dangerous and noting that such claims "are particularly ill-suited for application to what are essentially products liability claims because they impose liability even when the manufacturer provides adequate warnings"

  5. Felty v. Graves-Humphreys Co.

    818 F.2d 1126 (4th Cir. 1987)   Cited 1,548 times
    Holding that the Court may rely only upon the facts supported in the record, not Plaintiff's assertions in the pleadings

  6. Torrington Co v. Stutzman

    46 S.W.3d 829 (Tex. 2001)   Cited 529 times
    Holding that general-negligence findings in the context of premises liability are immaterial

  7. Ford Motor Co. v. Ledesma

    242 S.W.3d 32 (Tex. 2007)   Cited 334 times
    Holding that a fire was a “condition” when, hours after it was extinguished, a person slipped and fell trying to close a valve on the site of the fire

  8. Sanchez v. Bos. Sci. Corp.

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:12-cv-05762 (S.D.W. Va. Jan. 17, 2014)   Cited 234 times
    In Sanchez v. Boston Scientific Corp., 2014 WL 202787 (S.D. W. Va. Jan. 17, 2014), the district court denied Boston Scientific's motion for summary judgment on timeliness grounds.

  9. Hyundai Motor Co. v. Rodriguez

    995 S.W.2d 661 (Tex. 1999)   Cited 242 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding trial court should not have submitted breach-of-implied-warranty claim because "no evidence" supported it

  10. Hughes Wood Products, Inc. v. Wagner

    18 S.W.3d 202 (Tex. 2000)   Cited 178 times
    Holding that a movant for summary judgment must "satisfy its burden of proof with respect to fact questions necessary to the choice of law decision."

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,160 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 2.314 - Implied Warranty: Merchantability; Usage of Trade

    Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 2.314   Cited 210 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Adopting UCC § 2–314 as Texas law

  13. Section 2.313 - Express Warranties By Affirmation, Promise, Description, Sample

    Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 2.313   Cited 136 times
    Describing the ways in which a seller creates express warranties