Jackson v. General Motors Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 360K (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 7416 · 42 U.S.C. § 7521 · 42 U.S.C. § 7543 · 42 U.S.C. § 7604 · 49 U.S.C. § 41713 · 7 U.S.C. § 136V
Relies on Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc. · Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr · Middlesex County Sewerage Authority v. National Sea Clammers Assn. · Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. · New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“federal standards relating to the control of emissions from new motor vehicles because they require proof of both more and less than what is required to prevail on claims to enforce those standards. The state law claims therefore are not preempted by 209(a) of the Clean Air Act. 9 2. Implied Preemption VW alternatively argues that the state law claims are impliedly preempted under both field and conflict preemption principles. Under either theory VW's burden is high, for as noted above,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]here 'failure to warn claims are themselves premised on defective design claims found to be preempted, the ... failure to warn claims are also preempted by federal law.' ") (omission in original). Plaintiffs here, in contrast, can prevail on their claims without establishing that the class vehicles violated federal standards. Jackson , then, does not support VW's express preemption argument. 8 Plaintiffs' state law claims are not an "attempt to enforce”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“As 'it is the essence of the common law to enforce duties ... ,' it is clear that a state common law action that questions whether a defendant complied with standards promulgated under the CAA is an example of a state attempting to enforce the CAA, and is therefore subject to preemption.”
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.