Pfizer, Inc. v. Lord’s Empirical Analysis
447 F.2d 122 · 1971
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 11 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2000 · most notably Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach (1998), Fine Paper Antitrust Litigation State of Alaska v. Boise Cascade Corporation (1982)
20 federal appellate · 11 district · 2 state decisions
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 West Virginia v. Chas. Pfizer & Co. · Wyndham Associates v. Bintliff · A. Olinick & Sons v. Dempster Bros. · State of West Virginia v. Chas. Pfizer & Co.
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Any civil action in a district court against the United States under subsection (a) of section 1346, of this title may be prosecuted only: (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), in the judicial district where plaintiff resides; (2) In the case of a civil action by a corporation ... in the judicial district in which is located the principal place of business or principal office or agent of the corporation; ... Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this paragraph a district court, for the convenience of the parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, may transfer any such action to any other district or division.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[e]ach action so transferred shall be remanded by the panel.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]o hold that the transferee court ... has no section 1404(a) authority would mean that all proceedings on any section 1404(a) motion would have to be suspended for the entire period of pretrial....”
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.