Hiser v. Randolph’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently September 2007 · most notably Scafidi v. Seiler (1990), 99 Wash. 2d 609 - Herskovits v. Group Health Cooperative (1983)
4 federal appellate · 37 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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 Hamil v. Bashline · Cooper v. Sisters of Charity of Cincinnati, Inc. · Hicks v. United States · 172 Cal. App. 2d 756 - Agnew v. Parks · Savoca Masonry Co., Inc. v. Homes & Son Const. Co.
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]hat the mere loss of an unspecified increment of the chance for survival is, of itself, insufficient to meet the standard of probability.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“In this jurisdiction the tortious act of malpractice must be shown to have been the probable and not merely a possible cause of the death or other untoward result.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“While the various doctors in this case indicated that they were of the belief they had the right to refuse to treat an individual under varying cireumstances, the obviously intended effect of the bylaws and rules and regulations [of the hospital] was to obligate the emergency room doctor 'on call to provide emer-geney treatment to the best of the doe-tor's ability to any emergency patient of the hospital.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Miller v. Martig
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.