From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McDaniel v. Novartis Pharms. Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION
Jan 6, 2012
Case No. 2:08-CV-02088 (W.D. Ark. Jan. 6, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 2:08-CV-02088

01-06-2012

BRAD McDANIEL, As Personal Representative of Eula Mae McDaniel PLAINTIFF v. NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORP. DEFENDANT


JUDGMENT

For the reasons set forth in the Court's Order filed contemporaneously herewith, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff Brad McDaniel's Motion to Amend Order of Substitution (Doc. 122) is DENIED and Defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.'s Motion to Dismiss the Case (Doc. 126) is GRANTED. This case is accordingly dismissed with prejudice, and the parties are instructed to bear their own fees and costs.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 6th day of January, 2012.

___________

P.K. HOLMES, III

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

McDaniel v. Novartis Pharms. Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION
Jan 6, 2012
Case No. 2:08-CV-02088 (W.D. Ark. Jan. 6, 2012)
Case details for

McDaniel v. Novartis Pharms. Corp.

Case Details

Full title:BRAD McDANIEL, As Personal Representative of Eula Mae McDaniel PLAINTIFF…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION

Date published: Jan 6, 2012

Citations

Case No. 2:08-CV-02088 (W.D. Ark. Jan. 6, 2012)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. Novartis Pharms. Corp.

Caroline and Billy have not sought an extension of the ninety-day deadline fixed by Rule 25(a)(l) of the…

Watts v. Novartis Pharms. Corp.

In other cases, no action was ever taken to secure the appointment of a proper party. See e.g., Wilson v.…