 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Dickinson v. Usrey8/16/2001
Introduction
The issue in this interlocutory appeal is the propriety of certifying a class action of Texas health care workers who sustained a needlestick from an exposed, hollow-bore sharp needle already used on a patient and ready for disposal. Appellees claim that all syringes and needle-bearing medical devices manufactured by appellants Becton Dickinson and Company and Sherwood Medical Company are defectively designed, and they seek reimbursement for the cost of their post- needlestick testing. The class members do not seek mental anguish, emotional distress, or personal injury damages. Health care workers who have been infected with a blood-borne pathogen or who were stuck with a needle from a person known to be infected are excluded from the class.
Appellants contend that the trial court abused its discretion in certifying the class because (1) the common issues do not predominate over the individual issues; (2) a class action is not superior because the case will be impossible to manage and the federal government has provided the relief sought in the class action; (3) the named plaintiffs do not have typical claims and are not adequate representatives; and (4) blood collection devices should not have been included because no class representative claims to have been injured by such a product.
Because we conclude that common issues do not predominate in this class, we reverse the trial court's order and remand this cause to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Factual and Procedural Background
On April 9, 1998, Andrea Calvin and Debra Kale filed this strict product liability action on behalf of a class of Texas health care workers who accidently stuck themselves with syringes and other needle- bearing medical devices. The plaintiffs' original petition alleges that all conventional syringes and blood collection devices manufactured by Becton and Sherwood are defectively designed and that there are alternative designs available that prevent needlesticks. The class specifically excluded claims for damages for having contracted an infectious disease from a contaminated stick. One of the original plaintiffs nonsuited in 1998 and the other nonsuited in 1999. In November of 1998, three additional plaintiffs were joined, Aniagu Nwafor, Joan Usrey, and Sue Wang. Nwafor later nonsuited. Therefore, only two plaintiffs are left, Usrey and Wang.
The lone injury alleged is economic-appellees seek reimbursement for the reasonable cost of various tests they had after their needlesticks. Appellees were tested for HIV and hepatitis and found to be "negative for blood borne pathogens."
In May of 1999, appellees filed their motion for class certification. On January 13, 2000, the trial court granted the motion, certifying the class with two class representatives under Rule 42(b)(4) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. The trial court ordered that the case proceed as a class action on behalf of those persons who:
i. Were working in the health care industry ("health care workers" or "HCWs") in the State of Texas as either an employee or volunteer; and
ii. Between the period beginning two years prior to the filing of Plaintiffs' Original Petition on April 9, 1998, and ending on the date of this Order, by virtue of their work, were stuck with a needle used with a standard (non- safety) syringe device or standard (non-safety) blood collection device manufactured by Becton Dickinson & Co. or by Sherwood Medical Co.; and
iii. Were stuck after such needle was withdrawn from a patient and ready for disposal; and
iv. Reported the stick as
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|