Burrell v. Bayer Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
918 F.3d 372 · 2019
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 360C (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 360I (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 360K (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447
Relies on Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Taylor · Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr · Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. Thompson · Grable & Sons Metal Products Inc. Darue Engineering & Mfg.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“federal question jurisdiction exists pursuant to ERISA ... where the issue in dispute is of 'central concern' to the federal statute.' " Id. Thus, courts have repeatedly recognized ERISA's importance to the federal system. Finally, the substantial nature of the ERISA issue is confirmed by the purely legal nature of the ERISA issue raised by plaintiffs' claims and the real-world consequences resolution of that issue will have. In this respect, the Fourth Circuit has explained that "[a]s a practical matter, a 'substantial' question generally will involve a pure issue of law, rather than being fact-bound and situation-specific, because the crux of what makes a question 'substantial' for § 1331 purposes is that it is important ... to the federal system as a whole, and not just to the particular parties in the immediate suit.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he Court in Grable took the opportunity to clarify that Merrell Dow does not establish a bright-line rule that there can be no jurisdiction in contexts in which Congress has declined to provide a private right of action for enforcement of a federal statute.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“federal jurisdiction over a state law claim will lie if a federal issue is: (1) necessarily raised, (2) actually disputed, (3) substantial, and (4) capable of resolution in federal court without disrupting the federal-state balance approved by Congress.”
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.