Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 170 W. Va. 459 - Cross v. Trapp

170 W. Va. 459 - Cross v. Trapp’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
13
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 62 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably Largey v. Rothman (1988), 354 Pa. Super. 346 - Festa v. Greenberg (1986)

3 federal appellate · 62 state decisions — followed in 13 states

3001982199020002010decided

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 Phelps Dodge Corp. v. AFL-CIO Joint Negotiating Committee · Canterbury v. Spence · 163 W. Va. 332 - Bradley v. Appalachian Power Co. · Sard v. Hardy · Nugent v. United States

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

  1. “A physician has a duty to disclose information to his or her patient in order that the patient may give to the physician an informed consent to a particular medical procedure such as surgery. In the case of surgery, the physician ordinarily should disclose to the patient various considerations including (1) the possibility of the surgery, (2) the risks involved concerning the surgery, (3) alternative methods of treatment, (4) the risks relating to such alternative methods of treatment and (5) the results likely to occur if the patient remains untreated.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “When a patient asserts that a particular method of medical treatment, such as surgery, was performed by the patient’s privately retained physician without the patient’s consent, the hospital where that treatment was performed will ordinarily not be held liable to the patient upon the consent issue, where the physician involved was not an agent or employee of the hospital during the period in question.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Although expert medical testimony is not required under the patient need standard to establish the scope of a physician’s duty to disclose medical information to his or her patient, expert medical testimony would ordinarily be required to establish certain matters including: (1) the risks involved concerning a particular method of treatment, (2) alternative methods of treatment, (3) the risks relating to such alternative methods of treatment and (4) the results likely to occur if the patient remains untreated.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.