Wall v. Pahl’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1320D (§ 1176 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on State Ex Rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane County · Bruno v. Milwaukee County · 1 Wis. 2d 594 - Colla v. Mandella · 356 Wis. 2d 665 - Data Key Partners v. Permira Advisors LLC · Hoida, Inc. v. M & I MIDSTATE BANK
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'All patient health care records shall remain confidential. Patient health care records may be released only to the persons designated in this section or to other persons with the informed consent of the patient or of a person authorized by the patient.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Simply put, Wall's interpretation would 'place too unreasonable a burden' on health care organizations and their employees. We cannot fathom that the legislature intended to impose that type of burden when it enacted WIS. STAT. § 146.82.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“systems that either verified an employee's access was permissible each time he or she tried to access a patient record or required the employee to document his or her reasons for accessing a record each time he or she did so.”
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.