Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 490 A2D 43 - Anthony v. Abbott Laboratories

Anthony v. Abbott Laboratories’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
8
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 6 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably 44 Cal. 3d 1103 - Jolly v. Eli Lilly & Co. (1988), Pennwalt Corp. v. Nasios (1988)

2 federal appellate · 6 district · 29 state decisions

2201985199020002010decided

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 Bates v. State Bar · Goodman v. Mead Johnson & Co. · McKenna v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp. · 116 Wis. 2d 166 - Collins v. Eli Lilly & Co. · Wilkinson v. Harrington

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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[I]n a drug product-liability action where the manifestation of an injury, the cause of that injury, and the person's knowledge of the wrongdoing by the manufacturer occur at different points in time, the running of the statute of limitations would begin when the person discovers, or with reasonable diligence should have discovered, the wrongful conduct of the manufacturer.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]o construe the statute [of limitations] narrowly so as to preclude a person from obtaining a remedy simply because the wrong of which he was the victim did not manifest itself for at least two years from the time of the negligent conduct, is clearly inconsistent with the concept of fundamental justice. To require a man to seek a remedy before he knows of his rights, is palpably unjust.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “a person [should] have a reasonable opportunity to become cognizant of an injury.”
    3 later decisions 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.