Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 848 F.3d 151 - Huskey v. Ethicon, Inc.

Huskey v. Ethicon, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

848 F.3d 151 · 2017

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
November 2020
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr · 117 Ill. 2d 507 - Kirk v. Michael Reese Hospital & Medical Center · Westberry v. Gislaved Gummi AB · 231 Ill. 2d 516 - Mikolajczyk v. Ford Motor Co. · United States v. Carthorne

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

  1. “[w]e see no reason to distinguish [ Bard ] here. The information Ethicon sought to introduce would, at best, have had "tangential[ ]" relevance to the case. This relative lack of probative value, especially given a possible battle of experts over the 510(k) process, underscores the risks of confusion and wasted time that would follow the introduction of this evidence. Ethicon's effort to distinguish [ Bard ] on the ground that the [TVT's] 510(k) compliance process actually did focus heavily on safety would only amplify the risk, as the trial would then likely face a substantial diversion into just how rigorous those safety considerations were, how forthcoming Ethicon was to the FDA, and how robust the 510(k) process is.”
    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.