114 N.C. App. 297 - Clark v. Perry’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably 127 N.C. App. 1 - ESTATE OF SMITH, BY & THROUGH SMITH v. Underwood (1997), 130 N.C. App. 616 - Heatherly v. Industrial Health Council (1998)
26 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 Johnson v. Ruark Obstetrics & Gynecology Associates, P.A. · Waddle v. Sparks · United Laboratories, Inc. v. Kuykendall · 81 N.C. App. 159 - Lawing v. Lawing · 70 N.C. App. 627 - Estrada v. Jaques
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In any action for damages for personal injury or death arising out of the furnishing or the failure to furnish professional services in the performance of medical ... care, the defendant shall not be liable for the payment of damages unless the trier of the facts is satisfied by the greater weight of the evidence that the care of such health care provider was not in accordance with the standards of practice among members of the same health care profession with similar training and experience situated in the same or similar communities at the time of the alleged act giving rise to the cause of action.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Defendant, including by and through its agents, servants and assigns, including its nursing staff, was negligent in its care of [decedent] in that it, among other things: a. Failed to timely and adequately assess, diagnose, monitor and treat the conditions of [decedent] so as to render appropriate medical diagnosis and treatment of his symptoms; b. Failed to properly advise [decedent] of additional medical and pharmaceutical courses that were appropriate and should have been considered, utilized, and employed to treat [decedent's] medical condition prior to discharge; c. Failed to timely obtain, utilize and employ proper, complete and thorough diagnostic procedures in the delivery of appropriate medical care to [decedent]; d. Failed to exercise due care, caution and circumspection in the diagnosis of the problems presented by [decedent]; e. Failed to exercise due care, caution and circumspection in the delivery of medical and nursing care to [decedent]; f. Failed to adequately evaluate [decedent's] response/lack of response to treatment and report findings; g. Failed to follow accepted standards of medical care in the delivery of care to [decedent]; h. Failed to use their best judgment in the care and treatment of [decedent]; i. Failed to exercise reasonable care and diligence in the application of his/her/their knowledge and skill to [decedent's] care; j. Failed to recognize, appreciate and/or react to the medical status of [decedent] and to initiate timely and appropriate i”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] plaintiff in a medical malpractice action may proceed against a hospital ... under two separate and distinct theories- respondeat superior (charging it with vicarious liability for the negligence of its employees, servants or agents), or corporate negligence (charging the hospital with liability for its employees' violations of duties owed directly from the hospital to the patient)."”
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.