Wright v. Howmedica Osteonics Corp.
ORDER granting 15 Motion to Dismiss. If the Plaintiff wishes to amend her complaint, she may do so on or before August 24, 2017. Signed by Judge Gregory A. Presnell on 8/10/2017. (CHT)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JEAN ANN WRIGHT,
Case No: 6:17-cv-1133-Orl-31GJK
HOWMEDICA OSTEONICS CORP.,
This matter comes before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15) filed by the
Defendant, Howmedica Osteonics Corp., (HOC), and the Response in Opposition (Doc. 16) filed
by the Plaintiff, Jean Ann Wright.
According to the facts in the Complaint (Doc. 14), which are taken as true for the purposes
of this order, Wright had a total hip replacement in 2013. As part of the procedure, a Restoration
ADM System X3 Acetabular Insert manufactured by HOC was used. (Id. ¶ 7.) After the surgery,
Wright felt pain, swelling, and “other symptoms associated with a defective acetabular insert.” (Id.
Wright relies on these allegations to support a claim against HOC under the theory of strict
products liability. But these allegations fall short of fulfilling the pleading requirements of Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 8. See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (holding
that a plaintiff must allege facts that raise a right to relief above the speculative level and indicate
the presence of the required elements); Davila v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 326 F.3d 1183, 1185 (11th
Cir. 2003) (holding that conclusory allegations, unwarranted factual deduction, or legal
conclusions masquerading as facts will not prevent dismissal).
To establish strict liability under Florida law, a plaintiff “must show the manufacturer’s
relationship to the product in question, the defect, the unreasonably dangerous condition of the
product, and the existence of a proximate causal connection between the condition and the user’s
injuries or damage.” Levine v. Wyeth Inc., 684 F. Supp. 2d 1338, 1345 (M.D. Fla. 2010) (citing
Clark v. Boeing Co, 395 So. 2d 1226, 1229 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)).
Wright has merely alleged that HOC manufactured the acetabular insert, that the insert was
used in a partial hip replacement she received, and that she suffered pain, swelling and other
symptoms as a result. Wright has not identified the alleged defect or the unreasonably dangerous
nature of the product.
It is, therefore,
ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15) is GRANTED. If Wright wishes to
amend her complaint, she may do so on or before August 24, 2017.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, Orlando, Florida on August 10, 2017.
Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?