« Book Review Roundtable on Kathleen Brady's "The Distinctiveness of Religion in American Law" | Main | What to cover and when »

Tuesday, April 24, 2018

I only want to see you working on your Civ Pro test

Zimmer as Trustee for the Kin of Prince Rogers Nelson v. Trinity Medical Center, a wrongful death action in Illinois state court by Prince's Estate against the hospital and doctors in Moline, Illinois that treated him, and failed to recognize a possible overdose, about a week prior to his death, and Walgreen's, two Walgreen's stores, and several Walgreen's pharmacists for prescribing him medications improperly.

Consider:

• All the defendants are from Illinois, except for the two Walgreen's stores, which are located in Minnesota (where Prince was a citizen prior to his death). Those defendants destroy complete diversity, keeping the case in state court. And that likely is the reason they were sued. Of course, even without the non-diverse defendants, the case is not removable because of the forum-defendant rule.

• It is not clear how there could be personal jurisdiction over the stores. I presume they filled prescriptions for drugs for Prince in Minnesota and had no obvious connection or direction to Illinois in their prescription activities. There are allegations in the Complaint that sound in obtaining jurisdiction over the stores through their connections to Walgreen, which is an Illinois corporation with its PPB in Illinois and subject to general jurisdiction. So it is the converse of Daimler--attempting to use a parent to get jurisdiction over the underling.  I suppose there is purposeful availment through owning a Walgreen's franchise (which presumably requires some contractual or other relationship with Walgreen's), but those contacts don't give rise to this claim. (The analogy would be if someone who choked on a Burger King fry sued Rudzewicz in Florida, based on his franchise agreement with BK). Expect the stores to move to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction (although, because of the F/D/R, dismissing them has no removal effects).

• There is an interesting state venue question. The lawsuit was brought in the Circuit Court of Cook County. But Prince was treated at a hospital in Moline, Illinois, in Rock Island County. Illinois law makes venue proper in the county of residence of any defendant, with corporate defendants residing in any county in which it has a registered or other office or is doing business. Walgreen's headquarters is in Deerfield, in Cook County.

• The case offers a simple illustration of the fact that conduct in one state injuring someone who is from another state does not, without more, create personal jurisdiction in the injured person's home state. Hence the Estate going to Illinois rather than making the defendants come to Minnesota.

Posted by Howard Wasserman on April 24, 2018 at 08:23 PM in Civil Procedure, Howard Wasserman, Law and Politics | Permalink

Comments

Interesting , but it is not so clear , that the alleged cause of death ,is attributed solely to an overdose of the opiate . In " count I " it is claimed so . Yet , in count III , it is claimed that :

" ……notwithstanding said duty, defendant Walgreens and JANE DOE,NOS. 2-6 committed one or more deviations from the standard of care, including, but not limited to dispensing prescription medications not valid for a legitimate medical purpose and failing to conduct appropriate drug utilization review "

And claiming right after ,that the Prince may have died from it.

Thanks

Posted by: El roam | Apr 24, 2018 9:56:27 PM

Even if there is personal jurisdiction over the Walgreen stores, I don't see how there possibly could be personal jurisdiction over the Jane Doe pharmacists. Furthermore, I don't see why they needed to be named, unless there's some provision of Minnesota law that requires it and plaintiff expects a conflict of law problem. Super interesting case; thanks for pointing it out!

Posted by: Jack G | Apr 25, 2018 9:40:47 AM

Post a comment