Commonwealth v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In 1972, the General Assembly enacted Code § 32-139.1, which gave the Commonwealth and its institutions a lien for medical services rendered to a patient, upon the patient’s claim against a tortfeasor. Acts 1972, c. 481. That section, as amended, became Code § 8.01-66.9 in 1979. Acts 1979, c. 772. The lien given by that section has always been subject to the authority of the Attorney General, given by Code § 2.1-127, to compromise and settle the Commonwealth’s interest, with the approval of the head of the appropriate institution and, in the case of claims over a stated amount, with the approval of the Governor. Inevitably, a great many tort actions are settled only “at the courthouse door,” on or very close to the day fixed for trial. Where the plaintiffs claim is encumbered by a Commonwealth’s lien under Code § 8.01-66.9, it would be nearly impossible to obtain the requisite approvals within the executive branch of government in time to consummate a settlement before trial, unless efforts to do so were initiated well in advance. If plaintiff and defendant reached a tentative agreement shortly before trial, subject to the Attorney General’s willingness to compromise the lien, the difficulty of obtaining the requisite approvals before the trial begins would leave the parties only the alternatives of a long continuance, necessitated by a crowded docket, or submission to the hazards of trial. Because settlements, even last-minute ones, are very much in the public interest, the ”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ross v. Greene · COM., DEPT. OF MED. ASST. SERVS. v. Huynh

2. “may reduce the amount of the lien, and apportion the recovery between the plaintiff, the plaintiffs attorney, and the Commonwealth or such . . . institution as the equities of the case may appear, where the first offer acceptable to the plaintiffs attorney is not made until seventy-two hours prior to the date for trial.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rector of the University of Virginia v. Harris

3. “made a good faith effort to negotiate a compromise pursuant to [Code] § 2.1-127”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. COM., DEPT. OF MED. ASST. SERVS. v. Huynh