This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

This case involved personal liability to manufacturers from veterans and their families from the use of highly toxic pesticides during the Vietnam War. P sued to redress those injuries under federal common law. D opposed that suit by contesting the existence of a federal common law cause of action and moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. P contends that federal common law should be applied based on the unique federal nature of the relationship between and soldier and his government in that the government has an interest in having all of its veterans compensated by government contractors who manufactured the chemicals and that application of respective state laws would impede recovery. The district court rejected P's legal argument in that the government was not a party to the litigation (as was under the Clearfield Trust action). The district court then applied a three-factor test to determine whether federal common law applied; (1) a substantial federal interest in the outcome of the litigation; (2) the effect on the federal interest if the outcome should be applied to the state; (3) the effect on state interests should state law be displaced by federal common law. After applying this test, the District Court then ruled in favor of P. D appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.