Parrish v. Spink’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 67 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently September 2009 · most notably Lloyd Noland Foundation, Inc. v. Harris (1975), Holt v. Godsil (1984)
6 federal appellate · 67 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 25 Cal. 2d 486 - Ybarra v. Spangard · Davis v. Kerr · Carraway v. Graham · Sellers v. Noah · Snow v. Allen
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"An exception to the rule requiring testimony by a medical expert exists `in a case where want of skill or lack of care is so apparent as to be understood by a layman, and requires only common knowledge and experience to understand it....' [The medical technician's] affidavit raises at least a scintilla of evidence that this will prove to be such a case once the facts are more fully developed."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““In attending a patient a physician or surgeon undertakes to exercise that degree of care and skill as physicians and surgeons in the same general neighborhood, pursuing the same general line of practice ordinarily exercise in like cases.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Those cases which have applied the above rule concern the leaving of objects in a patient's body, such as forceps, gauze, sponges, needles, etc. (see 162 A.L.R. 1299 ), or injuries to the body remote from the area of the operation, such as an injury to an arm and shoulder during an operation for appendicitis (Ybarra v. Spangard , 25 Cal.2d 486 , 154 P.2d 687 , 162 A.L.R. 1258 [(1944)]), or an injury to an eye during the same type of operation. ( Meadows v. Patterson , 21 Tenn. App. 283 , 109 S.W.2d 417 [(1937)]).”
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.