Stephenson v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 state decisions

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““to prevent interference in the doctor-patient relationship, as long as it exists, and want to give the doctor an opportunity to treat and heal any injury the doctor may have caused. As the Ulrich[ 22 ] opinion states, some courts feel it is ‘absurd’ to require the plaintiff to interrupt corrective treatment in order to immediately commence legal proceedings. These opinions emphasize the trust and confidence placed in doctors by their patients. ... In other words, these courts do not want any disruption of the treatment that could end up healing the patient, thus avoiding a significant problem later and a lawsuit altogether.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 87 Mass. App. Ct. 787 - Parr v. Rosenthal

2. “control over the treatment of [the patient] by the other health-care providers”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Parr v. Rosenthal

3. “continued direct involvement in evaluating [the patient]'s progress”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Parr v. Rosenthal