Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 394 SO2D 2 - Ramey v. Guyton

Ramey v. Guyton’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably 431 So. 2d 1263 - Tucker v. Nichols (1983), McCormick v. Aderholt (2002)

2 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

1201980199020002010decided

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 368 So. 2d 516 - Garrett v. Raytheon Co., Inc. · Kelly v. Shropshire · Bagby Elevator and Electric Company, Inc. v. McBride · Sellers v. Edwards · 381 So. 2d 26 - Street v. City of Anniston

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

  1. “"(a) All actions against physicians, surgeons, dentists, medical institutions or other health care providers for liability, error, mistake or failure to cure, whether based on contract or tort, must be commenced within two years next after the act or omission or failure giving rise to *Page 1264 the claim, and not afterwards; provided, that if the cause of action is not discovered and could not reasonably have been discovered within such period, then the action may be commenced within six months from the date of such discovery or the date of discovery of facts which would reasonably lead to such discovery, whichever is earlier; provided further, that in no event may the action be commenced more than four years after such act; except, that an error, mistake, act, omission or failure to cure giving rise to a claim which occurred before September 23, 1975, shall not in any event be barred until the expiration of one year from such date." (Emphasis added.)”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"We find it patently unreasonable to attempt to fix the accrual date at the time the prescription was written, which act produced no concurrent injury to the Plaintiff."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “rule, [ Garrett ] remained true to the common law”
    2 later decisions 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.