Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 749 FSUPP 1473 - Snawder v. Cohen

Snawder v. Cohen’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
August 2022
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently August 2022

2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

601990200020102020decided

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

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 300A

Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Wrenn v. Board of Directors · Edgar v. McVey Trucking Co. · Buckley v. American Federation of Television & Radio Artists · Reyes v. Wyeth Laboratories

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

  1. “[tjhere are some products which, in the present state of human knowledge, are quite incapable of being made safe for their intended and ordinary use. These are especially common in the field of drugs.... Such a product, properly prepared, and accompanied by proper directions and warning, is not defective, nor is it unreasonably dangerous. The same is true of many other drugs, ... many of which for this very reason cannot legally be sold except to physicians, or under the prescription of a physician .... The seller of such products, again with the qualification that they are properly prepared and marketed, and proper warning is given, where the situation calls for it, is not to be held to strict liability for unfortunate consequences attending their use, merely because he has undertaken to supply the public with an apparently useful and desirable product, attended with a known but apparently reasonable risk.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness’ testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences that are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness, (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness’ testimony or the determination of a fact in issue, and (c) not based on scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “if the Vaccine Injury Table is revised to make vaccine-related injuries which were not formerly compensable eligible for compensation”) (emphasis added). Nor has petitioner met his burden of establishing “significantly increased”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.