Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 776 F.3d 1035 - McClellan v. I-Flow Corp.

McClellan v. I-Flow Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

776 F.3d 1035 · 2015

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
June 2024
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 360 (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) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291

Relies on Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr · Hillsborough County v. Automated Medical Laboratories, Inc. · Wyeth v. Levine · 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[1] compliance with both federal and state regulations is a physical impossibility, or [2] when state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “requested instructions would not usurp the exclusive federal enforcement power over the MDA. The allegations at issue occur outside the context of the regulatory process, unlike in Buckman . Where the plaintiff in Buckman alleged that the defendant made fraudulent representations during the market approval process, to the FDA, McClellan's requested instructions here have little to do with direct regulatory interaction with the FDA. The appellees would have us conclude that any use of federal law to establish a standard of care is an attempt to enforce the underlying federal provisions, but we do not accept that proposition.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “no suggestion that Congress intended to displace traditional tort law by making all policing of medical labels and warnings the exclusive province of the FDA.”
    2 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.