Plaintiffs v. Abbott Laboratories, an Illinois Corporation, Defendant.

1 Each of these legal theories is valid even though a dispute may
2 arise as to which one is binding in.light of the facts that will
3 be urcovered during the progress of this litigation. Either way,
4 Plaintiffs have a moral obligation to proceed with this lawsuit
5 in the hope that the study will proceed and lives will be saved.
6 17. There are no monetary damages that can compensate
7 Plaintiffs for Abbott's refusal to honor its promise to provide
8 the HIVIG drug for the study. Therefore, this action seeks,
9 among other remedies, specific performance of Abbott's promise to
10 provide HIVIG for the study.
11
12 The Facts
13 18. Abbott developed, tested, and gained the FDA's
14 approval for the HIVIG, a drug designed to treat, arrest and
15 prevent the transmission of HIV.
16 19. In 1989, Dr. Stiehm spoke to J.P. Allain, M.D.,
17 Ph.D., Manager of Abbott's Medical Research, Hepatitis and AIDS
18 Diagnostic Products ("Dr. Allain"), about using Abbott's HIVIG
19 drug in a proposed study developed by Dr. Stiehm to test the use
20 of passive immunotherapy in the treatment of HIV-infected
21 children.
22 20. In reliance on Dr. Allain's assurances that Abbott
23 would provide the HIVIG drug in Dr. Stiehm's study, on or about
24 January 1990, Dr. Stiehm drafted and submitted a concept sheet to
25 the AIDS Clinical Trial Group ("ACTG"), an organization within

26 the NIAID, proposing a study of the effectiveness of HIVIG in
27 preventing maternal-fetal transmission of HIV. Dr. Allain, I
28 designated the pharmaceutical investigator for the study,
6