Cady v. Schroll’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 district · 70 state decisions

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

1. “[W]e reaffirm the holding in those cases that [ Kan. Stat. Ann. §] 40-3403(h) absolves a health care provider not just from vicarious liability but from any responsibility, including independent liability, where the injured party's damages are derivative of and dependent upon the rendering of or the failure to render professional services by another health care provider.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Walker v. Corizon Health, Inc. · 355 F. Supp. 3d 1003 - Palmer v. Shawnee Mission Med. Ctr., Inc.

2. “[a] health care provider ... shall have no vicarious liability or responsibility for any injury or death arising out of the rendering of or the failure to render professional services inside or outside this state by any other health care provider....”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Walker v. Corizon Health, Inc. · 56 Kan. App. 2d 592 - Nash v. Blatchford

3. “[R]egardless of whether the liability arises from the negligent hiring and supervision of an independent contractor or an employee-employer relationship, the policy behind imposing liability on the principal is the same: making liable the entity or person who was in a position to protect the patient, who profited from the business relationship with the injured patient, and who is often best able to pay for the damages. See Marquis, 265 Kan. at 331 (discussing duty to supervise); McVay, 255 Kan. at 377 (discussing corporate negligence); Plains Resources, Inc. v. Gable, 235 Kan. 580, 590 , 682 P.2d 653 (1984) (discussing duty to hire and retain competent employees); see also Gilbert v. Sycamore Municipal Hospital, 156 Ill. 2d 511, 523 , 622 N.E.2d 788 (1993) (discussing policy reasons for recognizing vicarious liability of hospital for acts of independent-contractor physician). We recognize that K.S.A. 40-3403(h) arguably undermines the public policy behind these theories of liability and diminishes the protections otherwise available to patients. But 'courts "are not free to act on . . . [their own] view of wise public policy”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 57 Kan. App. 2d 271 - Brown v. Trobough