Ditlow v. Kaplan’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Canterbury v. Spence (1972), Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Ass'n (1983)
1 federal appellate · 28 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 Di Filippo v. Preston · Roberts v. Young · Govin v. Hunter · Williams v. Menehan · 159 So. 2d 888 - Bowers v. Talmage
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he standard to be applied is whether, according to expert testimony, a reasonable medical practitioner in the community would make such a disclosure under the same or similar circumstances.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“. It should be noted at this juncture that the plaintiff is not claiming on this appeal that the defendant was guilty of any negligence in the manner in which the gastroscopy was performed. Nor is there any dispute as to the fact that the plaintiff consented to the gastroscopy, and that she was informed that there were certain risks. The only question is whether, under the doctrine of informed consent, it was necessary to advise her as to the specific risks which might be encountered. [[Image here]] Our prior decisions indicate that the physician must adequately inform the patient about the dangers to be anticipated as a result of an operation, and that evidence of the standard prevailing in the community is necessary in order to demonstrate an issue as to the breach of this duty. See Bowers v. Talmage, Fla.App.1963, 159 So.2d 888 [(Fla. 3d DCA 1963) ]; Visingardi v. Tirone, Fla.App.1965, 178 So.2d 135 [ (Fla. 3d DCA 1965) ]. The plaintiff offered no evidence that it was the accepted practice in the community, among gastroenterologists and physicians of the defendant’s standing, to advise the patient of the specific risk of perforation. We are therefore of the opinion that this case must be affirmed upon the authority of [Visingardi ] and decisions cited therein.”
1 later decision 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.