1983 DES Case: Wetherill v. University of Chicago


Both Rachel Wetherill (“Wetherill”) and Maureen Rogers (“Rogers”) claim injury by exposure in utero to diethylstilbestrol (“DES”), administered to their mothers as part of a study (the “Study”) conducted by Dr. William Dieckmann (“Dieckmann”) in the early 1950s at the University of Chicago (“University”) hospitals. Each Complaint contains the same three counts:

  1. Count I charges University committed a battery by subjecting plaintiff’s mother to the Study without her prior knowledge or consent.
  2. Count II sounds in malpractice, asserting various acts of negligence by University and its hospital employees.
  3. Count III seeks recovery on strict liability grounds.

WETHERILL v. UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, Nos. 77 C 1434, 77 C 2485, leagle, 19831694570FSupp1124_11546, 570 F.Supp. 1124 (1983).

Both actions have reached the final pretrial order stage and have been added to this Court’s list of cases ready for trial. Each plaintiff has now filed motions in limine:

  1. to declare the relevance of the testimony of Dr. Brian L. Strom (Dr. Strom) to Counts I and II,
  2. to exclude evidence concerning University’s asserted routine practice of obtaining the consent of participants in the Study under Fed.R.Evid. (Rules) 403, 406 and 802.

Dr. Strom‘s proposed testimony is described in the final pretrial order:

He will testify that at the time of plaintiff’s exposure to DES, the University of Chicago … knew, or by the application of reasonable, developed human skill and foresight should have had knowledge of the dangers of DES use. Dr. Strom will also testify that DES was inadequately tested prior to its marketing for treatment of accidents of pregnancy. ” …

… continue reading WETHERILL v. University of Chicago on Justicia US Law or on leagle.

More DES DiEthylStilbestrol Resources


Have your say! Share your views