Doe v. Pharmacia & Upjohn Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an employer does not owe a duty to third-party spouse of employee when employee contracted HIV at work and transmitted it to his wife
• This Court set forth the same factors, characterizing them as a \non-exhaustive list for balancing the policy considerations inherent in the determination of whether a duty exists[.]\
• “Duty is an obligation, to which the law will give recognition and effect, to conform to a particular standard of conduct toward another.”
• company that cultivated and harvested HIV cultures for incorporation into test for HIV antibodies owed no duty of care to spouse of employee who tested positive for HIV following workplace exposure
• in answer to a certified question of law, determining that as a matter of law a company cultivating and harvesting the HTV virus for use in HIV antibody tests owed no legal duty to its employees’ spouses
• duty of care essential for breach of fiduciary duty claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).