Sidney-Vinstein v. A.H. Robins Company

697 F.2d 880 Gail SIDNEY-VINSTEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross Appellee v. A.H. ROBINS COMPANY, Hugh J. Davis, Irwin S. Lerner, Defendants-Appellees and Pee Wee Molding Corporation, Defendant-Appellee-Cross Appellant. No. 81-4118. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 12, 1982. Decided Jan. 28, 1983. Steven J. Brewer, Conklin, Davids & Friedman, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant-cross appellee. Thomas W. Kemp, Barbara L. Gately, Washburn & Kemp, San Francisco, Cal., argued, Kevin Dunne, Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold, San Francisco, Cal., on brief, for defendants-appellees. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Before WISDOM * and MERRILL, Senior Circuit Judges, and CHOY, Circuit Judge. WISDOM, Circuit Judge: 1 This is a diversity case. It involves negligence and products liability, and other claims arising out of injuries the plaintiff, Gail Sidney-Vinstein, suffered in 1973 through the use of the Dalkon Shield, an intrauterine contraceptive device (I.U.D.). She filed her complaint in November 1979, and the district court granted summary judgment for the defendants on December 10,…