241 Ill. 2d 194 - Kaufmann v. Schroeder’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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. ““[I]n Orlak [v. Loyola University Health System, 228 Ill.2d 1 , 319 Ill.Dec. 319 , 885 N.E.2d 999 (2007) ], this court reiterated that ‘arising out of patient care’ did not encompass ‘but for’ causation. Rather, it meant that the injury had ‘ “[t]o originate; to stem (from),” or “to result (from)” ’ the patient’s medical care or treatment.. See Orlak, 228 Ill.2d at 14-15 , 319 Ill.Dec. 319 , 885 N.E.2d 999 (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 115 (8th ed.2004)). “In the case before this court, Kauf-mann did not allege that she was injured because of the medical treatment she received. In other words, she did not claim that the ‘unnecessary’ exam and sedation she received during her hospitalization harmed her in any way. Rather, the harm resulted from the sexual assault. The sedation that was given and the ‘unnecessary’ exam (if one was, in fact, performed) were not part of Kaufmann’s medical treatment, but simply a means by which Schroeder was able to accomplish his sexual assault on Kaufmann. “In sum, we find that Kaufmann’s injury arose out of Dr. Schroeder’s sexual assault and not any medical care she received from him. The sexual assault, itself, was not medical care, nor was there even any pretense that Dr. Schroeder’s sexual acts were necessitated by, or in any way related to, the medical care he was providing to Kauf-mann. There was no suggestion by Schroeder that there existed a medical reason for his actions.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. M.C. v. Tallassee Rehabilitation, P.C.