Brown v. Shyne’s Empirical Analysis
1926
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 58 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently November 2011 · most notably Hendry v. United States (1969), People v. Angelo (1927)
6 federal appellate · 58 state decisions
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 Dent v. State of West Virginia · Union Pac Ry Co v. McDonald · Martin v. Herzog · Bourne v. Whitman · McRickard v. . Flint
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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. . Thereafter the trial judge charged the jury that they might bring in a verdict in favor of the plaintiff if they found that the evidence established that the treatment given to the plaintiff was not in accordance with the standards of skill and care which prevail among those treating disease. He then continued: ‘ ‘ ‘ This is a little different from the ordinary malpractice case, and I am going to allow you, if you think proper under the evidence in the case, to predicate negligence upon another theory. The public health laws of this state prescribe that no person shall practice medicine unless he is licensed so to do by the board of regents of this state and registered pursuant to statute. ... This statute to which I have referred is a general police .regulation. Its violation, and it has been violated by the defendant, is some evidence, more or less cogent, of negligence which you may consider for what it is worth, along with, all the other evidence in the case. If the defendant attempted to treat the plaintiff and to.adjust the vertebrae in her spine when he did not possess the (requisite knowledge and skill as prescribed by the statute to know what was proper and necessary to do. under the circumstances, or how to do it, even if he did know what to do, you can find him negligent.’ “In so charging the jury that from the violation of the statute the jury might infer negligence which produced injury to the plaintiff, the trial justice in my opinion erred. “. . . If violat”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.