SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts keyed to Robertson
Jolly v. Eli Lilly & Co.
Citation:
Supreme Court of California, 1988. 44 Cal.3d 1103, 751 P.2d 923.Facts
The Plaintiff, Jolly, was born in in 1951. While in utero, her mother took the synthetic drug estrogen diethylstilbestrol (DES) for the prevention of miscarriage. In 1972, the Plaintiff learned that daughters whose mothers took DES could suffer injuries. She went to a clinic for a check-up where she was diagnosed with adenosis, a precancerous condition that required careful monitoring. In 1976, she had an abnormal pap-smear and underwent a surgical procedure to remove abnormal tissue. In 1978, the Plaintiff underwent a complete hysterectomy and a partial vaginectomy in order to remove malignancy. As of 1972, the Plaintiff was aware or at least suspected her condition was a result of her mother’s taking of DES during pregnancy.
In 1972, the Plaintiff started to attempt to discover the manufacturer of the DES ingested by her mother. Her efforts later increased in 1976 and 1978 when her condition became acute. Unfortunately, the doctor who described her mother the drug died and the Plaintiff was unable to to locate his records. The dispensing pharmacist did remember filing the DES prescription, he did not recall having records relating to the specific brand used. This was not unusual since DES was a drug that hundreds of pharmaceutical companies made from a single agreed formula. As of 1978, the Plaintiff was aware of one or more pending DES suits alleging that DES manufacturers were liable to those injured due to their failure to test or failure to warn. However, Plaintiff believed she had no cause of action if she could not identify the particular manufacturer of the drug her mother took during pregnancy. Her efforts to identify that manufacturer were unsuccessful and the Plaintiff did not file suit.
In March 1980, the Supreme Court of California held in a case that if a plaintiff could not identify the precise drug manufacturer of the ingested DES, she could state a cause of action against the DES manufacturers of a substantial percentage of the market share of the drug. Defendants would be liable assuming the remaining material allegations in the complaint were proven unless they could disprove their involvement. A year after this decision, the Plaintiff brought an action against a number of DES manufacturers.
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.
Topic Resources
Topic Outline
NegligenceTopic Refresher Course
Negligence: Joint Tortfeasors, Identification and Contribution