Proctor

Proctor v. Worthington Cylinder Corporation

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 10, 20203:19-cv-08409California1,829 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 TAOS PROCTOR, et al., Case No. 19-cv-08409-EMC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’

v. MOTION TO REMAND

WORTHINGTON CYLINDER Docket No. 12 CORPORATION, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13 Plaintiffs are Taos Proctor and Kelly Proctor, husband and wife. They have filed suit against the following companies: (1) Worthington Cylinder Corp.; (2) The Coleman Company, Inc.; (3) Walmart Inc.; and (4) Dignity Health. They have sued the first three companies (collectively, the “Product Defendants”) because Mr. Proctor was injured after using a propane cylinder and torch manufactured, distributed, and/or sold by one or more of the companies. In addition, Mr. Proctor has asserted a claim against Dignity Health based on the allegation that it negligently treated him for the injuries that he sustained, thereby engaging in medical malpractice. The Proctors initiated the instant case in state court in January 2019. The Product Defendants…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.