Michelle Himes v. Somatics, LLC

I. Background

Appellants Michelle Himes, Marcia Benjamin, and Daniel Benjamin sued Appellee Somatics, LLC in diversity 1 for negligence, strict liability, and loss of consortium, alleging that Somatics’s misbranding and failure to warn about certain risks of its electroconvulsive therapy (“ECT”) device caused Himes and M. Benjamin their injuries. The district court granted summary judgment in favor Somatics after concluding that the appellants failed to establish causation due to an absence of evidence that stronger 1 Because this is a diversity action, the court applies California substantive law and federal rules of procedure. See Motus v. Pfizer Inc., 358 F.3d 659, 660 (9th Cir. 2004) (citing Bank of California v. Opie, 663 F.2d 977, 979 (9th Cir. 1981)). warnings would have affected their physicians’ decision to prescribe ECT.

On appeal, the appellants contend that the district court erred in applying an unduly demanding causation standard and that they established causation through testimony of the prescribing physicians that, had Somatics given them stronger warnings, they would have communicated those warnings to the appellants who, in turn, claimed they would not have…