224 So. 3d 1170 - Burchfield v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 708 So. 2d 731 - Evans v. Lungrin · Smith v. State Dept. of Health & Hosp. · 946 So. 2d 133 - Lam Ex Rel Lam v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins · Jackson v. Estate of Jones · 173 So. 3d 1192 - Oddo v. Asbestos Corp.
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Notably, in this case, the legal error in the verdict form did not affect all of the jury's findings, i.e., the jury's determination whether [Mr. Burchfield] suffered a lost chance of a better outcome-the record clearly supports that. The problem lies with the determination of the monetary amount of damages for that lost chance....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the answers to interrogatory numbers one and six on the jury verdict form to be patently inconsistent , leading to an inability of the jury to consider all of the damages suffered by the Burchfields as a result of Roger's heart transplant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“warranted postponing the surgery until a cardiology consult could be obtained [and that] the failure to review the chest x-ray report and request a cardiology consult was a factor of the resultant damages.”
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.