Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 251 F.2d 917 - Johnston v. Rodis

Johnston v. Rodis’s Empirical Analysis

251 F.2d 917 · 1958

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
3
states following
October 1981
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently October 1981

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions

901958196019701980decided

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.

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

  1. “Doubtless a physician’s statement that he would cure a disease could seldom if ever be regarded as a warranty. But that is not this case. The statement attributed to the defendant, that shock treatments are “perfectly safe”, contains less of prediction and more of present fact. We think this statement, if the defendant made it and did not qualify it in any way, might properly be found to be a warranty. It follows that summary judgment should not have been granted. [Id. at 210, 251 F.2d at 918 .]”
    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.