Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 102 FRD 239 - In re "Bendectin" Products Liability Litigation

In re "Bendectin" Products Liability Litigation’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
3
states following
April 1998
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1407

Relies on Afro American Patrolmens League v. Duck · Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Jerome · Hernandez v. The Motor Vessel Skyward · Coburn v. 4-R Corp. · Union Light, Heat & Power Co. v. U. S. District Court

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The Bendectin litigation is but one example of massive product liability lawsuits involving large numbers of plaintiffs, protracted trials and substantial litigation costs. The traditional court system is simply unequipped to handle such [mass tort] litigation in a conventional manner without materially depleting the judicial resources available for all other litigation. It is theoretically possible to assign sufficient judicial time to hear these cases promptly but only at the cost of further delay in an already overburdened system. The cost to the parties of litigating these cases under current procedures is such that few plaintiffs could afford the expense or the delay. Justice is not served by erecting tollgates at the courthouse door. There is a solution. The resolution of disputes does not necessarily require trial. Within the judicial authority of this Court is a means whereby the parties might be assisted in reaching a prompt and equitable disposition of the entire problem. That solution involves limited use of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A class certification would enable any proposed settlement to be presented to all class members and by them either accepted or rejected.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.