Gillette v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. , 683 F. App'x 538 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                IUnited States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 16-3567
    ___________________________
    In re: Mirapex Products Liability Litigation
    ------------------------------
    Kathryn Gillette; Raif Szczepanski
    lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants
    v.
    Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Pfizer, Inc.; Pharmacia Corporation;
    Pharmacia & Upjohn Company LLC
    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis
    ____________
    Submitted: April 12, 2017
    Filed: April 17, 2017
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before RILEY, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Kathryn Gillette and Raif Szczepanski appeal the district court’s1 adverse grant
    of summary judgment in their diversity action for damages based on a prescription
    drug’s alleged side effect on Gillette. Having carefully reviewed the record and the
    parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that summary judgment was properly
    granted for the reasons stated by the district court. See Beaulieu v. Ludeman, 
    690 F.3d 1017
    , 1024 (8th Cir. 2012) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo,
    viewing record in light most favorable to nonmovant); Integrity Floorcovering, Inc.
    v. Broan-Nutone, LLC, 
    521 F.3d 914
    , 917 (8th Cir. 2008) (district court’s
    determination of state law is reviewed de novo).2 Accordingly, the judgment is
    affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Michael J. Davis, United States District Judge for the District
    of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendation of the Honorable Franklin L.
    Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.
    2
    We do not consider allegations or claims that were not mentioned below. See
    Stone v. Harry, 
    364 F. 3d 912
    , 914 (8th Cir. 2001) (stating general rule that claims
    not presented in district court may not be advanced for first time on appeal).
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-3567

Citation Numbers: 683 F. App'x 538

Judges: Riley, Murphy, Shepherd

Filed Date: 4/17/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024