To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




In re Des Litigation

Citation. 7 F.3d 20 (2d Cir. 1993)
Law Students: Don’t know your Studybuddy Pro login? Register here

Brief Fact Summary.

Plaintiff sued Defendant and other drug manufacturers. Defendant moved to dismiss the lawsuit.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

A party lacks standing to appeal a judgment in their favor, unless they face collateral estoppel or an aspect of the judgment was not in their favor.


A synthetic form of estrogen, DES, was banned after being determined to cause cancer. A group of women (Plaintiffs) sued thirty-three DES manufacturers in New York, including Boehringer (Defendant), a Delaware corporation whose predecessor had manufactured and sold the drug. Defendant moved to dismiss the lawsuit for failure to state a claim under applicable law and lack of jurisdiction.


May a party appeal a favorable judgment when they are not faced with collateral estoppel and no part of the judgment was unfavorable?


No, the appeal is dismissed.


The Court determined that the Defendant lacked standing to appeal the favorable judgment. The Defendant did not face collateral estoppel from the judgment because the issues of jurisdiction and choice of law were not litigated and not necessary to the final judgment. The Defendant also did not point to any portion of the judgment as unfavorable, because the specific issues of jurisdiction and choice of law were part of the original denial of the Defendant’s motion to dismiss and not the final judgment.

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following