Green v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.’s Empirical Analysis
274 F.3d 263 · 2001
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 8 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably In Re New England Mutual Life Insurance Co. Sales Practices Litigation (2004), Dahl
6 federal appellate · 8 district ·
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Louisiana Eastern District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Pool v. Ford Motor Co. · American Tobacco Co., Inc. v. Grinnell · American National Red Cross v. S. G. · Sws Erectors Inc v. Infax 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[H]ere the defendants R.J. Reynolds, Brown and Williamson, and Philip Morris were all defendants in the Sanchez case, which involved a similar factual situation and legal conclusion (that Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.Code § 82.004 bars most products liability actions against manufacturers or sellers of cigarettes). Although Sanchez did not explicitly discuss removal, the effect of the decision in Sanchez has a similar effect on our case as the S.G. decision had on American Red Cross, i.e. that these defendants cannot be sued under Texas law. The similarities between this case and Sanchez bring this case within the limited parameters of American Red Cross. We therefore hold that the Sanchez opinion, under these very narrow circumstances, was an "order" for purposes of § 1446(b) removal in this case involving the same defendants, and a similar factual situation and legal issue.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“order or other paper from which it may first be ascertained that the case is one which is or has become removable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Manufacturing defect cases involve products which are flawed, i.e., which do not conform to the manufacturer’s own specifications, and are not identical to their mass-produced siblings. The flaw theory is based upon a fundamental consumer expectancy: that a mass-produced product will not differ from its siblings in a manner that makes it more dangerous than the others. Defective design cases, however, are not based on consumer expectancy, but on the manufacturer’s design of a product which makes it unreasonably dangerous, even though not flawed in its manufacture. Green v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 274 F.3d 263 , 268 (5th Cir.2001) (quoting Ford Motor Co. v. Pool, 688 S.W.2d 879 , 881 (Tex.Ct.App.1985), affd in part and rev’d in part on other grounds, 715 S.W.2d 629 (Tex.1986)). 7”
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.