779 F. Supp. 2d 642 - In Re Packaged Ice Antitrust Litigation’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
4 district ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 16 (§ 5 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 28 U.S.C. § 1407 · 28 U.S.C. § 1927
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Warth v. Seldin · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that they personally have been injured, not that injury has been suffered by other, unidentified members of the class ... which they purport to represent.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In addition to pleading sufficient facts to plausibly allege a nationwide conspiracy, the [complaint] alleges that IP Plaintiff Desmond resides in and purchased packaged ice in California, that as a result of the nationwide conspiracy each of the IP Plaintiffs has suffered injury in that they have paid more for packaged ice than they would have paid absent the conspiracy and that they have thereby suffered an injury. These facts are sufficient under Twombly to sustain the IP Plaintiffs’ burden at the pleading stage to plausibly suggest a claim under the Cartwright Act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“... would allow named plaintiffs in a proposed class action, with no injuries in relation to the laws of certain states referenced in their complaint, to embark on lengthy class discovery with respect to injuries in potentially every state in the Union. At the conclusion of that discovery, the plaintiffs would apply for class certification, proposing to represent the claims of parties whose injuries and modes of redress they would not share. That would present the precise problem that the limitations of standing seek to avoid.”
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.