495 F. Supp. 2d 1027 - In Re Bextra & Celebrex Marketing Sales Practices & Product Liability Litigation’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district ·

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

1. “[The IDCSA] requires only that the plaintiffs damages arise from defendant’s provision of such goods. Plainly stated, there is no mandate under the IDCSA that the plaintiff must be the consumer who purchased the goods primarily for personal purposes. Plaintiff is a valid consumer for purposes of the IDCSA, as its use of Actiq, through its payment for prescriptions of its members and beneficiaries, fits squarely within the ordinary meaning of the term “consume.” Plaintiffs payments for the drug arose from the sales of Actiq to its members and beneficiaries for the treatment of illnesses, with such transactions qualifying as consumer transactions for personal purposes under the IDCSA.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 221 F. Supp. 3d 227 - Sheet Metal Workers Local No. 20 Welfare & Benefit Fund v. CVS Health Corp.

2. “a sale to a corporation `for purposes that are primarily personal' qualifies as a consumer transaction within the meaning of the statute.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 790 F. Supp. 2d 313 - In Re Actiq Sales and Marketing Practices Litig.