In re Telectronics Pacing Systems, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently November 2016 · most notably 24 Cal. 4th 906 - Wash. Mut. Bank v. Superior Court of Orange Cty. (2001), Robin Zinser v. Accufix Research Institute, Inc. (2001)
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin · General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay · Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whether a fractured lead injured an individual implantee is a much simpler inquiry than in many medical products liability actions because it involves a direct and immediate wound to the body versus a latent, difficult to diagnose disease. For example, general resolution of the question whether a certain drug causes cancer or birth defects does little to determine if an individual’s cancer was caused by the drug. This individual causation question tends to be the overarching issue in these cases, and it overshadows other less complex issues and precludes the common issues from predominating.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[I]t is unrealistic to require a class action representative to have an in-depth grasp of the legal theories of recovery behind his or her claim. It is more important that the representative actively seeks vindication of his or her rights and engages competent counsel to prosecute the claims.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“practically speaking, for many of the `J' Lead recipients their only realistic claim may be for medical monitoring . . . . The superiority prong of Rule 23(b)(3) is satisfied if aggregation of small monetary claims is required to ensure vindication of legal rights.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.