Hill v. Wyeth, et al

Filing 412

ORDER re 411 Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Oral Motion for Consolidation of the Hill and Laferrara cases; Plaintiffs' oral motion to consolidate is DENIED. Signed by Judge William R. Wilson, Jr on 4/1/2010. (mkf)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION IN RE: PREMPRO PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION : : : : MDL DOCKET NO. 4:03-CV-1507-WRW

_____________________________________________________________________________ HELEN HILL v. 4:05-CV-00546-WRW PLAINTIFF

WYETH, et al. DEFENDANTS _____________________________________________________________________________ DIANE LAFERRARA v. WYETH, et al. ORDER I have just read Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Oral Motions for Consolidation of the Hill1 and Laferrara2 cases. Although, I told Plaintiffs they could respond by Wednesday, April 7, 2010, no response will be necessary. Plaintiffs' oral motion to consolidate the cases is DENIED. While there may be instances when consolidation will be appropriate, this is not one of those instances. The two plaintiffs are suing different manufacturers, took different drugs for different reasons, suffered different injuries,3 etc. IT IS SO ORDERED this 1st day of April, 2010. /s/ Wm. R. Wilson, Jr._____________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 4:04-CV-02271-WRW DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFF

1 2 3

Doc. No. 411. Doc. No. 24.

Although both women had breast cancer, one underwent a lumpectomy and the other underwent a mastectomy.