Richard Grandalski v. Quest Diagnostics Inc

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that plaintiffs did not establish predominance because they “failed to provide a sufficient, or virtually any, analysis describing how the grouped state laws might apply to the facts of this case”
• applying Maniscalco when the third factor of the Restatement was the sole factor that weighed in favor of the law of state where the defendant was headquartered
• noting the various factual scenarios that could lead to overbilling a patient for clinical testing and concluding that individual inquiries are required to determine whether the alleged overbilling constituted unjust enrichment
• “[I]ndividual inquiries would be required to determine whether an alleged overbilling constituted unjust enrichment for each class member.”
• “Plaintiffs were unable to find established case law for Delaware, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wyoming.”
• “New Jersey has adopted ‘the most significant relationship’ test set out in the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws.” (citing Camp Jaycee, 962 A.2d at 459–60)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Vince Mullins v. Direct Digital, LLC
  Seventh Circuit· 2015-07-28· cited 294×
• Crystal Byrd v. Aaron's Inc
  Third Circuit· 2015-04-16· cited 237×
• Neale v. Volvo Cars of North America, LLC
  Third Circuit· 2015-07-22· cited 226×
• In re: Suboxone Antitrust v.
  Third Circuit· 2020-07-28· cited 28×
• Dasilva v. Border Transfer of Ma, Inc.
  District of Columbia· 2017-11-09· cited 24×
• Portillo v. Nat'l Freight, Inc.
  D. New Jersey· 2018-06-11· cited 18×
• In Re: McCormick & Company, Inc., Pepper Products Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation
  District of Columbia· 2016-11-11· cited 15×
• McDonald v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
  W.D. Pennsylvania· 2019-04-16· cited 7×
• In re Actiq Sales & Marketing Practices Litigation
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2015-03-23· cited 6×
• Fenwick v. Ranbaxy Pharm., Inc.
  D. New Jersey· 2018-11-13· cited 3×
• In re Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2015-06-30· cited 2×
• Jarzyna v. Home Properties, L.P.
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2017-05-15· cited 2×
• Joanne Neale v. Volvo Cars North America
  Third Circuit· 2015-07-22
• Kacin v. Ohio Bur. of Motor Vehicles
  Ohio Court of Appeals· 2025-12-30

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
  Supreme Court· 2011-06-20· cited 4,653×
• Oswego Laborers' Local 214 Pension Fund v. Marine Midland Bank, N. A.
  New York Court of Appeals· 1995-02-14· cited 1,009×
• Marcus v. BMW of North America, LLC
  Third Circuit· 2012-08-07· cited 438×
• Unnamed case
  Third Circuit· 1996-06-27· cited 418×
• Leonard J. Klay v. Humana, Inc.
  Eleventh Circuit· 2004-09-01· cited 388×
• Sullivan v. DB Investments, Inc.
  Third Circuit· 2011-12-20· cited 369×
• John F. \Jack\ Walsh v. Ford Motor Company
  D.C. Circuit· 1986-12-19· cited 242×
• PV Ex Rel. TV v. Camp Jaycee
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 2008-11-24· cited 215×
• William Hayes v. WalMart Stores Inc
  Third Circuit· 2013-08-02· cited 193×
• Gabriel Carrera v. Bayer Corp
  Third Circuit· 2013-08-21· cited 193×
• In Re: Lifeusa Holding Inc., Lifeusa Holding, Inc.
  Third Circuit· 2001-03-05· cited 120×
• Maniscalco v. Brother International (USA) Corp.
  Third Circuit· 2013-03-08· cited 74×
• Agostino v. Quest Diagnostics Inc.
  D. New Jersey· 2009-02-11· cited 47×
• Hechinger Liquidation Trust v. James Austin Co. (In Re Hechinger Investment Co. of Delaware, Inc.)
  D. Delaware· 2004-12-13· cited 13×
• Douyon v. NY Medical Health Care, P.C.
  E.D. New York· 2012-09-28· cited 11×