Roginsky v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
378 F.2d 832 · 1967
Citation profile
86 federal appellate · 20 district · 51 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 226 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc. (2008), Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. (1973)
86 federal appellate · 20 district · 51 state decisions — followed in 21 states
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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 21 U.S.C. § 333 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act)
Relies on Bernhardt v. Polygraphic Co. of America, Inc. · Woodby v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Meredith v. City of Winter Haven · Stern v. Board of Levee Commissioners · Idaho Sheet Metal Works, Inc. v. Wirtz
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 226 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the New York cases afford no basis for our predicting that the Court of Appeals would adopt a rule disallowing punitive damages in a case such as [Roginsky ], and the Erie doctrine wisely prevents our engaging in such extensive law-making on local tort liability....”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]hen a federal court must determine state law, it should not slavishly follow lower or even upper court decisions but ought to consider all the data the highest court of the state would use.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We know of no principle whereby the first punitive award exhausts all claims for punitive damages and would thus preclude future judgments.... Neither does it seem either fair or practicable to limit punitive recoveries to an indeterminate number of first-comers, leaving it to some unascertained court to cry, ‘Hold, enough,’ in the hope that others would follow.” 378 F.2d at 839-40 .”
4 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.