Luna v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
888 F.2d 949 · 1989
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 2007
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 21 U.S.C. § 393 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 823 (§ 303 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2403 · 42 U.S.C. § 257A
Relies on Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · Hines v. Davidowitz · Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp. · Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul · Fidelity Federal Savings and Loan Association v. D Cuesta
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The passage of the 1970 Act resulted in a substantial increase in the number of methadone treatment clinics nationwide. As a result, the risk of illegal diversion of methadone increased. The 1974 Act was passed primarily to respond to this problem. Its chief purpose was "to curb the diversion and abuse of narcotic drugs used in the treatment of narcotic addicts.” Congress found that "the use of methadone in the treatment of heroin addiction involves unique and unusually great risks of diversion and criminal profiteering, and noted that a frequent source of illicit methadone was diversion by addicts abusing take-home privileges”. The 1974 Act was accordingly designed to "permit flexibility in treatment, while requiring adequate accountability for narcotic drugs administered in that treatment. It ... provide[s] a statutory complement to the FDA regulation, and provide [s] more specific controls over diversion.””
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.