Skip to main content
Tenth Circuit· 5/10/2002

Hollander v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp.

Citations

  • 289 F.3d 1193
  • 58 Fed. R. Serv. 1299
  • 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 9066
  • 2002 WL 963423

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that differential diagnosis expert testimony of a causal connection between a prescription drug (Parlodel
  • concluding that differential diagnosis expert testimony of a causal connection between a prescription drug (Parlodel
  • concluding that differential diagnosis expert testimony of a causal connection between a prescription drug (Parlodel
  • holding that dismissal without prejudice is appropriate where a district court lacks personal jurisdiction over a defendant
  • holding that the lower court’s jurisdictional ruling, which did not address the claim’s merits, should have been dismissed without prejudice
  • concluding that a dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction is without prejudice to refiling in an appropriate forum

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ebel, Henry, Rogers

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.