Rayford v. Karl Storz Endoscopy Am., Inc.

Full title: AUDREY RAYFORD, ET AL. v. KARL STORZ ENDOSCOPY AMERICA, INC., ET AL.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA MONROE DIVISION

Date published: Aug 17, 2016

CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-2835 (W.D. La. Aug. 17, 2016)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-2835

08-17-2016

AUDREY RAYFORD, ET AL. v. KARL STORZ ENDOSCOPY AMERICA, INC., ET AL.

JUDGE ROBERT G. JAMES

MAG. JUDGE KAREN L. HAYES

JUDGMENT

The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge having been considered [Doc. No. 38], no objections thereto having been filed, and finding that same is supported by the law and the record in this matter,

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the motion to dismiss [Doc. No. 8], filed by Defendants Karl Storz Endoscopy of America, Inc. and Karl Storz Endovision is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED to the extent these Defendants are sued as Manufacturers and seek dismissal of Plaintiffs' LPLA claims for a manufacturing defect, as well as Plaintiffs' non-LPLA claims for strict liability, breach of express and implied warranty, fraudulent misrepresentation, and punitive damages, and DENIED as to Plaintiffs' claims under the LPLA for defects in design, inadequate warning, and express warranty, as well as their non-LPLA claims under redhibition and Plaintiff Darryl Rayford's claim for loss of consortium.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the motion to dismiss is GRANTED in favor of both Defendants, to the extent that they are sued as non-manufacturer sellers, and seek dismissal of Plaintiffs' claims under the LPLA, their non-LPLA claims for strict products liability, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, and punitive damages, and DENIED as to Plaintiffs' claims under redhibition.

MONROE, LOUISIANA, this 17^th day of August, 2016.

/s/ _________

ROBERT G. JAMES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE