Tullock v. Eck’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

59 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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, all actions for medical injury shall be commenced within two (2) years after the cause of action accrues. (b) The date of the accrual of the cause of action shall be the date of the wrongful act complained of and no other time.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Raynor v. Kyser · Pastchol v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance

2. “The burden of sustaining a motion for summary judgment is always the responsibility of the moving party. Cordes v. Outdoor Living Center, Inc., 301 Ark. 26 , 781 S.W.2d 31 (1989). All proof submitted must be viewed in a light most favorable to the party resisting the motion and any doubts and inferences must be resolved against the moving party. Summary judgment is appropriate “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Ark. R. Civ. P. 56(c). While there might well have been disputed issues of negligence had this case gone to trial, the only issue with which we are concerned is whether the statute of limitations was tolled by continuous treatment. As to the latter, there is no factual dispute. The question is thus whether Dr. Eck was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Pastchol v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance · Hardie v. Estate of Davis

3. “[I]f the treatment by the doctor is a continuing course and the patient’s illness, injury or condition is of such a nature as to impose on the doctor a duty of continuing treatment and care, the statute does not commence running until treatment by the doctor for the partiem lar disease or condition involved has terminated — unless during treatment the patient learns or should learn of negligence, in which case the statute runs from the time of discovery, actual or constructive.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2010 Ark. App. 807 - Mendez v. Glover