Lyons v. Grether’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 67 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably Harris v. Kreutzer (2006), Luckett v. Jennings (1993)
8 federal appellate · 67 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Findlay v. Board of Sup'rs of County of Mohave · Parkell v. Fitzporter · 36 Cal. App. 2d 199 - McNamara v. Emmons · Vann v. Harden · Hansen v. Pock
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“physician's duty arises only upon the creation of a physician-patient relationship; that relationship springs from a consensual transaction, a contract, express or implied, general or special....”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“entrusted his treatment to [Dr. Solos-Kountouris] and the physician accepted the case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A physician’s duty arises only upon the creation of a physician-patient relationship; that relationship springs from a consensual transaction, a contract, express or implied, general or special, McNamara v. Emmons, 36 Cal. App. 2d 199, 204-05 , 97 P.2d 503, 507 (1939); and a patient is entitled to damages resulting from a breach of a physician’s duty. See 61 Am. Jur. 2d, Physicians, Surgeons, Etc., § 96 (1972); 70 C.J.S., Physicians and Surgeons, §§ 37, 38 (1951). Whether a physician-patient relationship is created is a question of fact, turning upon a determination whether the patient entrusted his treatment to the physician and the physician accepted the case. Parkell v. Fitzporter, 301 Mo. 217 , 256 S.W. 239 (1923); Hansen v. Pock, 57 Mont. 51 , 187 P. 282 (1920); Peterson v. Phelps, 123 Minn. 319 , 143 N.W. 793 (1913). . . . We consider next how a physician-patient relationship, once created, may be lawfully terminated. As a general rule, unless the services to be rendered are conditioned or limited by notice or by the terms of employment, the physician-patient relationship continues until the services are no longer needed, Vann v. Harden, 187 Va. 555, 565 , 47 S.E.2d 314, 319 (1948); however, the relationship may be terminated earlier by mutual consent or by the unilat eral action of the patient; and under certain circumstances, the physician has a right to withdraw from a case, provided the patient is afforded a reasonable opportunity to acquire the services he needs fr”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Johnson v. Stafford
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.