Thompson v. Summers’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably Jenner v. Dooley (1999), North American Truck & Trailer, Inc. v. M.C.I. Communication Services, Inc. (2008)
34 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 Conley v. Gibson · California v. Civil Aeronautics Board · City of St. Louis v. Thomas W. Garland, Inc. · Wagner v. International Railway Co. · Jackson Sawmill Co. 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief. [Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 , 78 S.Ct. 99, 102 , 2 L.Ed.2d 80, 84 (1957).] The question is whether in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and with doubt resolved in his or her behalf, the complaint states any valid claim of relief.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(5) tests the law of a plaintiff's claim ...”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“for any civil damages as a result of their acts of commission or omission arising out of and in the course of their rendering in good faith, any emergency care and services during an emergency which is in their judgment indicated and necessary at the time. " Id. (emphasis added). The key and limiting language of the statute lies in the requirement that the protected act "aris[e] out of and in the course of rendering. . . emergency care and services during an emergency. " Id. (emphasis added). I would not interpret this language to mean the Legislature intended to protect a volunteer fireman who speeds on his way to the fire station or fire on a public highway in his own vehicle without emergency lights or other method of warning to other motorists or pedestrians. Responding to a fire alarm is not technically "rendering emergency care and services during an emergency.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.