Oswin v. Shaw’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 6 district · 234 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 246 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably DiProspero v. Penn (2005), Young v. Schering Corp. (1995)
2 federal appellate · 6 district · 234 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 Judson v. Peoples Bank & Trust Co. of Westfield · Shaw v. Railroad Co. · Licari v. Elliott · Scafidi v. Seiler · DiFranco v. Pickard
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 246 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“permanent consequential limitation of use of a body organ or member”
39 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Because most range-of-motion tests are based only on patients' pain responses, they ordinarily will not suffice unless the restricted mobility is verified by physical examination and observation.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[a] plaintiff must show a nexus between the injury and the disability.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.