Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1982

Joplin v. A. H. Robins Co.

Joplin v. A. H. Robins Co.
Court of Appeals of Oregon · Decided September 15, 1982 · Buttler, Rossman, Warren
59 Or. App. 405; 650 P.2d 192; 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 3791

Joplin v. A. H. Robins Co.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Dortch v. A.H. Robins Co., Inc., 59 Or App 310, 650 P2d 1046 (1982).

Rossman, J., dissenting.

Dissenting Opinion

ROSSMAN, J.,

dissenting.

I dissent from the majority opinion for the same reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in Dortch v. A.H. Robins Co., Inc., 59 Or App 310, 650 P2d 1046 (1982).1

As in Dortch v. A.H. Robins Co., Inc., 59 Or App 310, 650 P2d 1046 (1982), plaintiff has alleged that she did not “learn” of the relationship between the defective nature of the Daikon Shield and her intrauterine infections until a date more than eight years from the date the device was inserted. The relevant chronology in this case is illustrated by the diagram below.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.