McClellan v. I-Flow Corporation

Filing 225

ORDER: Defendant I-Flow's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 102 ) is Reserved until close of evidence trial. Signed on October 21, 2009 by Chief Judge Ann L. Aiken. (cp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

CHRISTINA MCCLELLAN, Plaintiff,

Civ. No. 07-1309-AA ORDER

I-FLOW CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, et al., Defendants. DONNELL COX; DAVID DOOLITTLE and CAROLYN DOOLITTLE, husband and wife; JUAN A, HUERTA; and KATHERINE FORREST, Plaintiffs, Civ, No. 07-1310-AA ORDER

DJO, LLC, a Delaware corporation, et a l . , Defendants.
AIKEN,

Chief Judge: filed

Plaintiffs

suit

alleging

negligence

and

products

liability arising from the post-operative use of pain pump devices

1

- ORDER

in their shoulder joints. Plaintiffs Christina McClellan and Juan Huerta subsequently amended their complaints to allege punitive damages against defendant I-Flow, Inc. (I-Flow). I-Flow now moves for summary judgment on the punitive damages claims, arguing that neither McClellan nor Huerta presents facts to show that I-Flow consciously and recklessly disregarded a known risk by promoting its pain pump devices far intra-articular uses. Based on the parties1 submissions, I find it questionable whether plaintiffs' claims for punitive damages will survive and be submitted to a jury. Plaintiffs present scant evidence that I-Flow knew of a causal relationship between its pain pumps and

glenohumeral chondrolysis when

plaintiffs

underwent

shoulder

surgeries in 2004, such that I-Flow acted with "reckless and outragecus indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm" and with "conscious indifference to the health, safety and welfare of others" by marketing its pain pumps for intra-articular uses. Or.

Rev. Stat.

§

31.730 (1) Andor v. United Air Lines. Inc., 303 Or. ;

505, 517, 739 P.2d 18 (1987) (punitive damages "are a penalty for

conduct that

is

culpable by

reason of

motive,

intent,

or

extraordinary disregard of or indifference to known or highly probable risks to others"). Nonetheless, I decline to grant summary judgment at this time, preferring to resolve the motion after review of all evidence presented at trail.

2

- ORDER

Accordingly, defendant I-Flow's
Judgment (07-1309-AA
doc.

Motions for P a r t i a l Summary

1 0 2 ; 07-1310-AA d o c . 3 4 1 ) a r e RESERVED

u n t i l the close of evidence at trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED t h i s
d a y of October, 2 0 0 9 .

Ann Aiken C h i e f U n i t e d S t a t e s District Judge

3

-

ORDER