Byrnes v. Small’s Empirical Analysis
2015
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 301 (Animal Drug Amendments of 1968) · 21 U.S.C. § 331 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 337 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 360C (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 360E (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 360I (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 360K (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr · Buckman Company V.' Legal Committee · Riegel v. Medtronic, 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Riegel and Buckman create a narrow gap through which a plaintiffs state-law claim must fit if it is to escape express or implied preemption. The plaintiff must be suing for conduct that violates the FDCA (or else his claim is expressly preempted by § 360k(a)), but the plaintiff must not be suing because the conduct violates the FDCA (such a claim would be impliedly preempted under Buckman).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]o the extent that the claim is based on [an alleged] failure to report adverse events to the FDA, it is impliedly preempted”); McClelland, 2012 WL 5077401 , at (”
1 later decision 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.