233 Ill. App. 3d 372 - Gilbert v. Frank’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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

1. “"precision pleading should not be required if knowledge of the pertinent facts is within the control of the defendant rather than the plaintiff. (Holton v. Resurrection Hospital (1980), 88 Ill. App. 3d 655, 658 .) In the case at bar, the hospital would have had knowledge about the nature of its relationship with [the physician], but it is highly unlikely that plaintiff would have had access to this information when she filed her complaint. Therefore we do not believe it is unfair to the hospital to construe the allegation that [the physician] was its agent to be an allegation that he was either an actual or apparent agent. We conclude that plaintiff adequately alleged in count II that [the physician] was an apparent agent of the hospital and reject the hospital’s contrary contention.” Gilbert v. Frank, 233 Ill. App. 3d at 377 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 174 Ill. 2d 482 - Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., Ltd.

2. ““The undersigned has been informed of the emergency treatment considered necessary for the patient whose name appears above and that the treatment and procedures will be performed by physicians and employees of the hospital. Authorization is hereby granted for such treatment and procedures.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 156 Ill. 2d 511 - Gilbert v. Sycamore Municipal Hospital