Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 256 F.3d 1013 - Mark Eck Sandra Keck Travis Eck Megan Eck v. Parke Davis & Company Warner-Lambert Company the Rugby Group Inc and Rugby Laboratories Inc

Mark Eck Sandra Keck Travis Eck Megan Eck v. Parke Davis & Company Warner-Lambert Company the Rugby Group Inc and Rugby Laboratories Inc’s Empirical Analysis

256 F.3d 1013 · 2001

Citation profile

159
cited by 159 later decisions
1
states following
December 2020
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 112 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 159 later decisions — most recently December 2020 · most notably Thom v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. (2003), Stickley v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance (2007)

17 federal appellate · 112 district · 1 state decisions

1180200120102020decided

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 Reyes v. Wyeth Laboratories · Wooderson v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp. · Van Buskirk v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd. · Hulsey v. Kmart, Inc.

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

  1. “Where a product is available only on prescription or through the services of a physician, the physician acts as a “learned intermediary” between the manufacturer or seller and the patient. It is his duty to inform himself of the qualities and characteristics of those products which he prescribes for or administers to or uses on his patients, and to exercise independent judgment, taking into account his knowledge of the patient as well as the product. The patient is expected to and, it can be presumed, does place primary reliance upon that judgment. The physician decides what facts should be told to the patient. Thus, if the product is properly labeled and carries the necessary instructions and warnings to fully apprize the physician of the proper procedures for use and the dangers involved, the manufacturer may reasonably assume that the physician will exercise the informed judgment thereby gained in conjunction with his own independent learning, in the best interest of the patient.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Summary judgment is appropriate if `the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “but we are governed by federal law in determining the propriety of the district court's grant of summary judgment.”
    2 later decisions 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.