Abboud v. Viscomi’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
10 district · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Colbert v. Georgetown University (1994), 251 N.J. Super. 256 - Cafferata v. Peyser (1991)
10 district · 38 state decisions
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
Relies on Lopez v. Swyer · Burd v. New Jersey Telephone Company · Vispisiano v. Ashland Chemical Co. · Lynch v. Rubacky · 168 N.J. Super. 333 - Silverman v. Lathrop
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"is to avoid harsh results that otherwise would flow from mechanical application of a statute of limitations." [ Vispisiano, supra, 107 N.J. at 426 , 527 A. 2d 66 ]. Accordingly, the doctrine "postpon[es] the accrual of a cause of action" so long as a party reasonably is unaware either that he has been injured, or that the injury is due to the fault or neglect of an identifiable individual or entity. Id. at 426-27 , 527 A. 2d 66 ; accord Lynch v. Rubacky 85 N.J. 65, 70 , 424 A. 2d 1169 (1981); Lopez, supra, 62 N.J. at 274, 300 A. 2d 563 . Once a person knows or has reason to know of this information, his or her claim has accrued since, at that point, he or she is actually or constructively aware "of that state of facts which may equate in law with a cause of action." Burd v. New Jersey Tel. Co., 76 N.J. 284, 291 , 386 A. 2d 1310 (1978). [ Abboud v. Viscomi, 111 N.J. 56, 62-63 , 543 A. 2d 29 (1988).]”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“`postpon[es] the accrual of a cause of action' so long as a party reasonably is unaware either that he has been injured, or that the injury is due to the fault or neglect of an identifiable individual or entity. [ Vispisiano 107 N.J. ] at 426-427 [ 527 A. 2d 66 ]; accord Lynch v. Rubacky, 85 N.J. 65, 70 [ 424 A. 2d 1169 ] (1981); Lopez v. Swyer, supra, 62 N.J. at 274 [ 300 A. 2d 563 ].”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“for purposes of [its] decision both the court’s finding that while still under his care plaintiff suspected defendant had done something wrong, and its implicit judgment that such suspicion satisfied the requirement that in order for a claim to accrue, the plaintiff actually or constructively knew her injury was due to another’s fault or neglect. [ Abboud, supra, 111 N.J. at 63 , 543 A.2d 29 .]”
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.