Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lilly v. Johnson & Johnson

September 22, 2010

LUCILLE LILLY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF CHARLES EDWARD ADDISON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JANSSEN, L.P. A/K/A JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICA PRODUCTS, L.P., AND ALZA CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: William M. Skretny Chief Judge United States District Court

DECISION AND ORDER

Presently before this Court is an Application to Settle filed by Plaintiff Lucille Lilly, Administratrix for the Estate of Charles Edward Addison, who has settled this case against Defendants. Because this action is brought on behalf of an estate, it cannot be settled without leave of this Court. See Local Rule 41.1(c).

This Court has considered Plaintiff's application and the papers filed in support thereof and finds that no hearing is required. This Court further finds that the proposed settlement is in the best interests of the estate and distributee. In so finding, this Court has considered (1) the circumstances giving rise to the claim, (2) the nature and extent of damages, (3) the terms of the settlement and amount of attorney's fees and other disbursements, (4) the circumstances of any other claims or settlements arising out of this same occurrence, and (5) Plaintiff's statement of why she believes this settlement is in the best interests of the estate and distributee. See Local Rule 41.1(c). Plaintiff's motion will therefore be granted and this settlement approved.

IT HEREBY IS ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Application to Settle (Docket No. 30) is GRANTED.

FURTHER, that the proposed settlement is APPROVED.

FURTHER, that this Court grants leave to settle this action in accordance with the terms set forth in the July 1, 2010 order of the Erie County Surrogate's Court, attached as Exhibit C to Plaintiff's Application to Settle (Docket No. 30-4).

FURTHER, that this action is dismissed with prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs and attorney's fees.

FURTHER, that the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

SO ORDERED.

Buffalo, New York.

20100922

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.