Bollenbach v. Bloomenthal’s Empirical Analysis
1930
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently November 2006 · most notably 95 Ill. 2d 452 - Franciscan Sisters Health Care Corp. v. Dean (1983), 32 Ill. 2d 446 - Metz v. Central Illinois Electric & Gas Co. (1965)
4 federal appellate · 48 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 Johnson v. Pendergast · McClure v. Hoopeston Gas & Electric Co. · Feldman v. Chicago Railways Co. · Coal Creek Drainage & Levee District v. Sanitary District · Chicago Union Traction Co. v. Giese
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The naked facts that the defendant performed operations upon her eye, that pain followed, and that subsequently the eye was in such bad condition that it had to be extracted, established neither the neglect and unskillfulness of the treatment nor the causal connection between it and the unfortunate event herein. A physician is not a warrantor of cures. If the maxim res ipsa loquitur were applicable to a case like this, and a failure to cure were held to be evidence, however slight, of negligence on the part of the physician or surgeon causing the bad result, few would be courageous enough to practice the healing art, for they would have to assume financial liability for nearly all the ills that flesh is heir to.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. O'Neil v. State
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.