Fernandi v. Strully’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 24 district · 204 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 267 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Goodman v. Mead Johnson & Co. (1976), Lopez v. Swyer (1973)
20 federal appellate · 24 district · 204 state decisions — followed in 23 states
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2401 · 45 U.S.C. § 56 (Federal Employers' Liability Act)
Relies on Urie v. Thompson · Chase Securities Corp. v. Donaldson · Wood v. Carpenter · Ayers v. Morgan · 6 Cal. 2d 302 - Huysman v. Kirsch
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 267 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"It must be borne in mind that Mrs. Fernandi's claim does not raise questions as to her credibility nor does is rest on matters of professional diagnosis, judgment or discretion. It rests on the presence of a foreign object within her abdomen following an operation performed upon her by the defendant-doctors. Here the lapse of time does not entail the danger of a false or frivolous claim nor the danger of a speculative or uncertain claim. The circumstances do not permit the suggestion that Mrs. Fernandi may have knowingly slept on her rights but, on the contrary, establish that the cause of action was unknown and unknowable to her until shortly before she instituted suit. Justice cries out that she fairly be afforded a day in court and it appears evident to us that this may be done, at least in this highly confined type of case, without any undue impairment of the two-year limitation or the considerations of repose which underlie it." 173 A.2d at 286 . (Emphasis supplied.)”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“N.J.S.A. 2A:14-2 provides that: 17 Every action at law for an injury to the person caused by the wrongful act, neglect or default of any person within this state shall be commenced within 2 years next after the cause of any such action shall have accrued. 18 Whether the plaintiff asserts a legal theory of negligence or of breach of warranty, this statute covers all personal injury claims. 8 The same statute applies to a husband's per quod claim, which is only maintainable because of injury to his wife. 9 But the statute is silent as to when”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he question when a cause of action accrues is a judicial one, and to determine it in any particular case is to establish a general rule of law for a class of cases, which rule must be founded on reason and justice.... In the absence of legislative definition and specification, the ... courts have often been called upon to delineate the statute; they have consciously sought to apply it with due regard to the underlying statutory policy of repose, without, however, permitting unnecessary individual injustices.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.