Opinion

JKB, Sr. v. Armour Pharmaceutical Co.

  • 660 N.E.2d 602
  • 1996 Ind. App. LEXIS 26
  • 1996 WL 22708
Court
Indiana Court of Appeals
Filed
Jan 24, 1996
Status
Published
Author
Chezem
On the bench
Robertson, Baker, Chezem
Cited by
43 cases

noting that the specific inclusion of a reference in one part of a statutory scheme implies that its omission elsewhere was intentional

How later courts described this case

  • noting that the specific inclusion of a reference in one part of a statutory scheme implies that its omission elsewhere was intentional
  • “Words and phrases are taken in their plain, ordinary, and usual meaning unless a different purpose is manifested by the 'statute.”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

CHEZEM, Judge,

concurring in result.

I concur in result. While I agree that summary judgment should not have been granted against JKB, I arrive at this conclusion for reasons different than the majority's.

The pharmaceutical companies argue that they are protected by the Blood Shield Statute, Ind.Code § 1641-12-11, because they fall within the definition of a "storage facility." "As used in the Blood Shield Statute, 'storage facility' has the meaning set forth in IC 29-2-16-1." Ind.Code § 16-41-12-9. According to Ind.Code § 29-2-16-1(a), storage facility means "a facility licensed, accredited or approved under the laws of any state for storage of human bodies or parts thereof." The pharmaceutical companies assert that their FDA licenses qualify them as being licensed for storage "under the laws of any state." I do not believe that the legislature was referring to an FDA license when it drafted that language..

Indiana Code Section 16-41-12-16 outlines what it means to be licensed in Indiana, and, I believe, provides guidance for the resolution of the. present issue. That section states:

It is unlawful to operate a blood center in Indiana without a license issued by the state department under this chapter. A blood center that applies for a license in Indiana must also be Hicensed or appropriately registered by the federal Food and Drug Administration and remain in compliance with all applicable federal regulations.

16-41-12-16(a) (emphasis added). Therefore, merely having an FDA license or registration is not enough to operate a blood center in Indiana; a blood center must have a registration or license from the FDA and a license issued by the State of Indiana. As used in Ind.Code § 16-41-12, the term "blood center" expressly includes a "blood storage facility." Ind.Code § 16-41-12-8. Accordingly, it seems reasonable that an out of state blood storage facility which distributes blood products in Indiana would need to be licensed for storage by a state as well as be licensed or registered by the FDA in order to fall within the parameters of a "storage facility" as used in the Blood Shield Statute..

The appellees have not designated any evidence which would indicate that they are licensed to store blood, blood products, etc., in Indiana, or in any other state. They have only produced the licenses from the FDA. These are not enough to bring them within the protection of the Blood Shield Statute.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.