4 ms·
This was our lowest level of state court. I don't think it even counts as precedent in other courts in Oklahoma, though it can probably be viewed as persuasive.
by henryfjordan 7y ago
This was our lowest level of state court. I don't think it even counts as precedent in other courts in Oklahoma, though it can probably be viewed as persuasive. This ruling has no bearing in other states.
It does give a good roadmap for how to sue and win against J&J though.
EDIT: There might be a way to use this case as a basis for collateral estoppel, meaning that J&J would have a harder time disputing the liability (since they were decided to be liable in this case) but I'm not sure if that applies across state lines.
- staticautomatic 7y agoThe "precedent" at issue is not about the ruling as a matter of common law but as an indicator of verdicts to come.
- henryfjordan 7y ago"precedent" is a term of art in law. It strictly means another court HAS to make the same ruling given the same/similar facts.
- staticautomatic 7y agoThis particular case has not set such a precedent.
- egdod 7y ago> There might be a way to use this case as a basis for collateral estoppel, meaning that J&J would have a harder time disputing the liability (since they were decided to be liable in this case) but I'm not sure if that applies across state lines. I've never heard of someone making this argument successfully.