Pfizer, Inc. v. Lott’s Empirical Analysis
417 F.3d 725 · 2005
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1446 · 28 U.S.C. § 1453 (§ 5 of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc. · In re Brand Name Prescription Drugs Antitrust Litigation · Merle Manguno v. Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Company · Phillips v. Seiter · Knudsen v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Wjhile it is true that the proceeding in federal court was “commenced” by the filing of the removal petition, that filing was not the beginning of the suit. For what was removed was the suit that had been brought in the Illinois state court, and under Illinois law the filing of the complaint had “commenced” the suit. Nothing changed except the forum. The principle is recognized in decisions involving the transfer of cases that were filed in the wrong forum initially; the transfer does not commence a new suit for purposes of deciding whether the suit is timely. Moreover, were [defendant-appellant’s] reading adopted, we would have to rewrite the statute in order to create an exception for cases such as Knudsen and Pritchett in which the removed suit had been filed more than 30 days before removal. That necessity suggests that [defendant-appellant’s] reading is incorrect. The injustice of which it complains is not so great as to justify radical judicial surgery on the statute.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“`commenced' indeed means `filed' rather than `removed.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bush
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.