Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 248 FSUPP2D 1 - Whitaker v. Thompson

Whitaker v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
September 2018
most recently cited

3 district ·

Relationships

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 301 (Animal Drug Amendments of 1968) · 21 U.S.C. § 321 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 343 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 5 U.S.C. § 3331 · 5 U.S.C. § 706

Relies on Elrod v. Burns · Central Hudson Gas Electric Corporation v. Public Service Commission of New York · Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc. · Bates v. State Bar of Arizona · City of Lakewood v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co.

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Consumption of antioxidant vitamins may reduce the risk of certain kinds of cancers.” Whitaker, 248 F.Supp.2d at 2 ; see also Pearson I, 164 F.3d at 652 . 13 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[I]t is generally 'not for the judicial branch to undertake comparative evaluations of conflicting scientific evidence.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.