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

P was a hemophiliac. From 1974 to 1987, P purchased and internally injected an antihemophilic factor known as factor VIII. D comprises the complete market of manufacturers, processors, marketers, and distributors from which P purchased factor VIII over his lifetime. P contracted AIDS. P died in 1987. P’s estate sued Ds for negligence in that Ds solicited blood from donors from a high-risk segment of the population, they failed to perform screening, and heat-treating tests and they failed to warn P of factor VIII risks. P asserts that from 1982 to 1985 Ds solicited donors known to have a high risk of contracting AIDS without informing P of this risk and that they marketed improperly-treated factor VIII products, despite the fact that they knew that these products could lead to the contraction of AIDS. P asserts that he 'cannot identify with certainty the manufacturer or manufacturers that marketed Factor responsible for the AIDS virus transmitted to P. P sought leave to amend the complaint to state theories of liability based on market share, concerted action, and alternative liability.

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.