Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 623 F.3d 271 - Pustejovsky v. PLIVA, Inc.

Pustejovsky v. PLIVA, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

623 F.3d 271 · 2010

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
August 2019
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Rene Lemaire v. Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development · Alm v. Aluminum Co. of America · Brown v. City of Houston · Beattie v. Madison County School District · Brumfield v. Hollins

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

  1. “WARNING TARDIVE DYSKINESIA Treatment with metoclopramide can cause tardive dyskinesia, a serious movement disorder that is often irreversible. The risk of developing tardive dyskinesia increases with duration of treatment and total cumulative dose. Metoclopramide therapy should be discontinued in patients who develop signs or symptoms of tardive dyskinesia. There is no known treatment for tardive dyskinesia. In some patients, symptoms may lessen or resolve after metoclopramide treatment is stopped. Treatment with metoclopramide for longer than 12 weeks should be avoided in all but rare cases where therapeutic benefit is thought to outweigh the risk of developing tardive dyskinesia. 2009 Reglan/Metoclopramide Label (Doc. # 130, attach. 8).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “speculat[ion] about other ways an adequate warning might have reached [the treating physician] and altered her decision”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “did not recall ever reading the package insert”
    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.