Smith v. E R Squibb & Sons, Inc’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 6 district · 25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 97 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia (1992), Seley v. G. D. Searle & Co. (1981)
36 federal appellate · 6 district · 25 state decisions — followed in 12 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.
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 97 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“reasonable care under the circumstances.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“any risks inherent in the use of [a] drug which the manufacturer knows or should know to exist,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“This opinion is limited solely to its facts. We do not suggest that implied warranty and negligence are not independent causes of action. When the factual issue is the adequacy of the warnings given, the legal standard under either theory is one of reasonable care under the circumstances. Note should be made, however, that on different facts it could be prejudicial error not to give the implied warranty instruction. See, e.g., Midgley v. S S Kresge Co, 55 CalApp3d 67; 127 CalRptr 217 (1976) (issue of contributory negligence requires instruction on both negligence and strict liability).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.