Fitzgerald v. Advanced Spine Fixation Systems, Inc.

                             REVISED - August 5, 1999
                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                          FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT


                                    No. 97-50563

KEN FITZGERALD, doing business
as Performance Orthopaedics,
                                                               Plaintiff-Appellant,
                                       versus

ADVANCED SPINE FIXATION SYSTEMS, INC.,
                                                              Defendant-Appellee.


                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Western District of Texas


                                    July 21, 1999
Before POLITZ, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
POLITZ, Circuit Judge:

      The undisputed facts of this case are relatively straightforward.       Ken
Fitzgerald, doing business as Performance Orthopedics, was dismissed from a

products liability suit because, although Fitzgerald sold some of the allegedly
defective spinal fixation devices, he did not sell the devices which were implanted

in the plaintiffs.     Fitzgerald subsequently sought indemnification from the

manufacturer of the allegedly defective products, Advanced Spine Fixation
Systems, for the attorneys’ fees and costs incurred defending the action. The

district court denied Fitzgerald’s motion for summary judgment and granted

Advanced Spine’s adverse motion, finding that the Texas Products Liability Act of

                                          1
1993, Tex. Civ. Pract. & Rem. Code Ann. § 82.002, did                   not provide for
manufacturer indemnity to retailers that did not sell the “injuring product” to the

plaintiffs.

          On appeal we noted that this was an unresolved issue of state law and
certified the following question to the Supreme Court of Texas:

                 Whether the Texas Products Liability Act of 1993, Tex. Civ.
          Pract. & Rem. Code Ann. § 82.002, requires a manufacturer of an
          injuring product to indemnify a retailer that was forced to defend itself
          in products liability litigation even though the retailer, who sold
          products of the same or similar type involved in the suit, did not sell
          the particular product claimed to have harmed the underlying
          plaintiff.1
The Supreme Court of Texas accepted certification and, in a majority opinion,
answered the question in the affirmative.2             Accordingly, in this diversity

jurisdiction action, being informed by the Supreme Court of Texas that the Texas
Products Liability Act of 1993 allows Fitzgerald to seek indemnity from Advanced

Spine for attorneys’ fees and costs, we VACATE the judgment of the district court
and REMAND for further proceedings consistent herewith.




  1
   Fitzgerald v. Advanced Spine Fixations Sys., Inc., 143 F.3d 935, 936 (5th Cir.
1998).
      2
     Fitzgerald v. Advanced Spine Fixation Sys., Inc., No. 98-0560, 1999 WL
450861, at * 1 (Tex. July 1, 1999).
                                             2