Opinion · Nylaw New York

MTR OF N.Y. ST SILICONE BREAST IMPLANT LITIG, 227 A.D.2d 310 [1st Dept 1996]

In the Matter of N.Y. STATE SILICONE BREAST IMPLANT LITIGATION.CAROLINE E. SORGER et al., Appellants, v. DOW Chem. CORPORATION,Respondent, et al., Defendants., 642 N.Y.S.2d 681 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department. 1996)

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1996-05-28
Topic: general

MTR OF N.Y. ST SILICONE BREAST IMPLANT LITIG, 227 A.D.2d 310 [1st Dept 1996] 642 N.Y.S.2d 681 In the Matter of NEW YORK STATE SILICONE BREAST IMPLANT LITIGATION.CAROLINE E. SORGER et al., Appellants, v. DOW CHEMICAL CORPORATION,Respondent, et al., Defendants.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department. May 28, 1996 Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.).

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed MTR OF N.Y. ST SILICONE BREAST IMPLANT LITIG, 227 A.D.2d 310 [1st Dept 1996]. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

MTR OF N.Y. ST SILICONE BREAST IMPLANT LITIG,227 A.D.2d 310[1st Dept 1996]

642 N.Y.S.2d 681

In the Matter of NEW YORK STATE SILICONE BREAST IMPLANT LITIGATION.

CAROLINE E. SORGER et al., Appellants, v. DOW CHEMICAL CORPORATION,

Respondent, et al., Defendants.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.

May 28, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.).Page 311

The IAS Court properly determined in its initial orders that there was no basis for liability in light ofIn re Silicone GelBreast Implants Prods. Liab. Litig.(837 F. Supp. 1128). Although the Federal court thereafter partially vacated its prior determination and found that the defendant-respondent arguably owed a duty to the general, indeterminate class of medical patients obtaining silicone implants based on a theory of negligent undertaking (887 F. Supp. 1455), the IAS Court properly declined to follow that revised determination. A party who gives advice to a manufacturer of consumer goods does not owe a duty to then-unknown individual purchasers of the manufacturer's goods (see, Howard v. Poseidon Pools,133 Misc.2d 50,53,affd inrelevant part134 A.D.2d 926,affd on other grounds72 N.Y.2d 972).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Wallach, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.