Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 25 WIS2D 645 - Fehrman v. Smirl

Fehrman v. Smirl’s Empirical Analysis

1964

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
3
states following
November 2006
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 51 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently November 2006 · most notably 176 Wis. 2d 740 - Beacon Bowl, Inc. v. Wisconsin Electric Power Co. (1993), 63 Wis. 2d 148 - Allstate Insurance Co. v. Truck Insurance Exchange (1974)

6 federal appellate · 51 state decisions

17019641970198019902000decided

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 Pfeifer v. Standard Gateway Theater, Inc. · Robinson v. Crotwell · Cummings v. National Furnace Co. · Bolles v. Kinton · Morrill v. Komasinski

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

  1. “When proof of negligence is offered, the trial judge, in contemplating the instructions which he will give to the jury, must evaluate the testimony to determine if there has been such substantial proof of negligence as to render superfluous the giving of an instruction on res ipsa loquitur. Sometimes the question as to the adequacy of the proof of negligence will be a close one; it will be within the sound discretion of the trial judge to determine whether the giving of the instruction will be redundant.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““. . . the introduction of some evidence which tends to show specific acts of negligence on the part of the defendant, but which does not purport to furnish a full and complete explanation of the occurrence does not destroy the inferences which are consistent with the evidence, and so does not deprive the plaintiff of the benefit of res ipsa loquitur.” Prosser, Law of Torts (Hornbook Series) (3d ed.), ch. 6, p. 236, sec. 40.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"You are instructed, Members of the Jury, that it was the duty of Dr. McDonnell to exercise the same degree of care and skill in his treatment and in his surgery upon Oscar Fehrman as was required of Dr. Smirl, and that Dr. Smirl would be responsible for any failure upon the part of Dr. McDonnell to exercise such care and skill."”
    2 later decisions 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.