Gargiulo v. Ohar’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 79 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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1. the nature of the function performed by the employee; 2. the extent of the state’s interest and involvement in the function; 3. the degree of control and direction exercised by the state over the employee; and 4. whether the act complained of involved the use of judgment and discretion.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lohr v. Larsen · Marrow v. Rogers

2. “required to obey state-established rules, to employ state-prescribed methods, and to follow state-standardized procedures,”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lohr v. Larsen · Dandridge v. Bio-Medicus, Inc.

3. “At the point when the physician agrees to treat or operate on a certain patient, although his employment by the [Commonwealth] makes possible the arrangement, the relationship becomes the personal and confidential one of doctor and patient, not the Commonwealth ... and patient. The physician owes his best professional efforts on behalf of the patient, and the patient expects, and has a right to expect, the same care and attention from the physician that he would receive if he were in a private hospital and the physician in private practice. The exercise by the attending physician of his professional skill and judgment in treating his patient, and the means and methods used, from the very nature of things, are not subject to the control and direction of others.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Lohr v. Larsen