Knipe v. Smithkline Beecham’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 301 (Animal Drug Amendments of 1968) · 21 U.S.C. § 355 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 396 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 201 (ADAMHA Reorganization Act)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · United States v. Diebold, Inc. · Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Some states require no warning, see Robak v. Abbott Labs., 797 F.Supp. 475, 476 (D.Md.1992), while others have varying levels of requirements for adequate warning of an off-label use. Miles Labs., Inc. v. Superior Court, 133 Cal.App.3d 587 , 184 Cal.Rptr. 98 (1982) (manufacturer liable for failure to warn of risks of off-label uses of its product if the manufacturer knew or should have known of the off-label use and that use accounted for a significant portion of the manufacturer’s sales of the drug); Peterson v. Parke Davis & Co., 705 P.2d 1001, 1003 (Colo.Ct.App.1985); Reeder v. Hammond, 125 Mich.App. 223 , 336 N.W.2d 3, 5-6 (1983) (intervening negligence of a physician precludes the manufacturer’s liability for failure to warn of risks of off-label use).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In making this determination, this Court must look to an array of factors: (i) the place where the injury occurred; (ii) the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred; (iii) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of incorporation, and place of business of the parties; and (iv) the place where the relationship, if any, between the parties is centered.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[A] patient prescribed an off-label use of a drug may be a reasonably foreseeable user of the product, such that a manufacturer has a duty to warn of all known adverse effects associated with such use.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Trisvan v. Heyman
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.