Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 235 Va. 607 - Grubbs v. Rawls

Grubbs v. Rawls’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
4
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably Horton v. Carolina Medicorp, Inc. (1996), Rowntree v. Hunsucker (1992)

7 federal appellate · 47 state decisions

3601988199020002010decided

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 Farley v. Goode · Keller v. Denny · McCormick v. Romans · Fenton v. Danaceau · Boone v. C. Arthur Weaver Co., Inc.

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

  1. “Part of our rationale in Farley was that as long as the physician-patient relationship continued as to a particular mal-ady or injury, then it could not be said that treatment had ceased.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “continuous and substantially uninterrupted course of examination and treatment”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “if there existed a physician-patient relationship where the patient was treated for the same or related ailments over a continuous and uninterrupted course, then the plaintiff could wait until the end of that treatment to complain of any negligence which occurred during that treatment.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.