Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 693 F.2d 847 - Northern District of California v. A H Robins Company J

Northern District of California v. A H Robins Company J’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

200
cited by 200 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
15
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 28 district · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 200 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2018 · most notably Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc. (2008), 44 Cal. 3d 1103 - Jolly v. Eli Lilly & Co. (1988)

9 federal appellate · 28 district · 33 state decisions — followed in 15 states

5701980199020002010decided

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 Piper v. Chris-Craft Industries, Inc. · La Mar v. H & B Novelty & Loan Co. · Doninger v. Pacific Northwest Bell, Inc. · Mary Green v. Occidental Petroleum Corp. · In Re "Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation

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

  1. “[n]o single happening or accident occurs to cause similar types of physical harm or property damage.”
    18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(A) the interest of members of the class in individually controlling the prosecution or defense of separate actions; (B) the extent and nature of any litigation concerning the controversy already commenced by or against members of the class; (C) the desirability or undesirability of concentrating the litigation of the claims in the particular forum; (D) the difficulties likely to be encountered in the management of a class action.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[a] 'mass accident' resulting in injuries to numerous persons is ordinarily not appropriate for a class action”
    9 later decisions 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.