141 F. Supp. 2d 105 - Pearson v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
8 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Central Hudson Gas Electric Corporation v. Public Service Commission of New York · Firestone v. K Firestone · 880 F. Supp. 37 - State of NY v. United States · Pearson v. Shalala · National Center for Manufacturing Sciences v. Department of Defense
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Defendants again seem to ignore the thrust of Pearson I. While that decision might leave certain specific issues to be fleshed out in the course of future litigation, the philosophy underlying Pearson I is perfectly clear: that [ ] First Amendment analysis applies in this case, and that if a health claim is not inherently misleading, the balance tilts in favor of disclaimers rather than suppression.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Whitaker v. Thompson
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.