Pettus v. Gottfried’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
January 2012
most recently cited
21 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on John v. Wong Shik Im · Combs v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co. · Hubbard v. Commonwealth · Brooks v. Bankson · Spruill v. Commonwealth
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“was factual in nature because it served to explain the impressions and conclusions [the cardiologist] reached while treating [the decedent].”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. King v. Cooley · Holmes v. Levine“[o]nly diagnosis offered to a reasonable degree of medical probability shall be admissible at trial.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The purpose of this statute is to define the scope of discovery and trial testimony that may be required of a treating physician when the physical or mental condition of a patient is at issue in a civil action. The plain language of the statute places within the scope of discoverable and admissible information the diagnosis or treatment plan of the treating physician as documented in the patient’s medical record. Also within the scope of discoverable and admissible information are the facts communicated to the treating physician and any other facts learned by that physician in connection with the care of the patient.”
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.