20-1329·TORT

Fredric Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc.

Affirmed in Part

Status

Scheduled
Argued
Opinion Issued (current)

Question Presented

Whether district court erred by concluding that statements were defamatory per se; additional issues related to personal jurisdiction, excessive damages, and attorney's fees.

Argument Date

May 4, 2021

Argument Time

9:30 a.m.

Panel

Lower Court Judge

Dever

Associated Cases

20-1376

Panel

Chief Judge Gregory

Judge Motz

Judge Thacker

Citation

CaseFredric Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., No. 20-1329 (4th Cir. June 23, 2021)

PanelGregory, C.J., Motz & Thacker, JJ.

Arguing Counsel

Roman Martinez

per CA4 audio archive

Elizabeth Locke

per CA4 audio archive

Panel That Day

3 of 3 cases argued May 4, 2021 before this panel have been decided.

Decided

19-1693

Ingrid Nolasco-Figueroa v. Merrick Garland

Opinion Issued

Authored by Per Curiam

20-1329· This case

Fredric Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc.

Opinion Issued

Authored by Judge Motz

20-1408

Michael Zito v. N.C. Coastal Resources Comm. Amendment

Opinion Issued

Authored by Chief Judge Gregory

Opinions

Majority
by Motz
June 23, 2021
Read opinion ↗

Disposition

Court: Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded for further proceedings
Normalized: Affirmed in Part

June 23, 2021