Hoffman v. Davidson’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
83 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Gaines v. Preterm-Cleveland, Inc. (1987), Frysinger v. Leech (1987)
83 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 Bruni v. Tatsumi · Oliver v. Kaiser Community Health Foundation · Saunders v. Choi · Mathis v. Cleveland Public Library · Richards v. St. Thomas Hospital
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 88 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“attested to his qualifications; explained the requisite standard of care of a podiatric surgeon; explained the steps he took to inform Marie Hoffman of the alternatives to surgery, the potential complications involved in the surgical procedure and the surgical procedure itself; stated that he reviewed this information with [the plaintiff] prior to the surgery; and further attested that his examination, diagnosis and surgery were performed in accordance with proper and accepted standards of podiatric care and treatment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Plaintiffs' listing of doctors upon whom they intended to rely to support their claims was not sufficient to counter Davidson's affidavit. Plaintiffs included no doctor's reports in their answers to the interrogatories and, therefore, there was no genuine issue of fact presented to the trial court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““As we held in Mathis v. Cleveland Pub. Library (1984), 9 Ohio St.3d 199, 202 , 9 OBR 511, 514, 459 N.E.2d 877, 880 , this rule clearly provides that plaintiffs were required to file opposing affidavits or some evidence to place in issue the facts alleged in the Davidson affidavit.””
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.