Nancy P. v. D'AMATO’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 37 district · 65 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 114 later decisions — most recently June 2023 · most notably 48 Cal. 3d 583 - Marlene F. v. Affiliated Psychiatric Medical Clinic, Inc. (1989), Sullivan v. Boston Gas Co. (1993)
10 federal appellate · 37 district · 65 state decisions — followed in 10 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
Relies on 27 Cal. 3d 916 - Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Agis v. Howard Johnson Co. · Payton v. Abbott Labs · Foley v. Polaroid Corp. · Ferriter v. Daniel O'Connell's Sons, Inc.
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 114 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Institute expresses no opinion as to whether there may not be other circumstances under which the actor may be subject to liability for the intentional or reckless infliction of emotional distress.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Where such conduct is directed at a third person, the actor is subject to liability if he intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress (a) to a member of such person’s immediate family who is present at the time, whether or not such distress results in bodily harm, or (b) to any other person who is present at the time, if such distress results in bodily harm.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“1) that the actor intended to inflict emotional distress or that he knew or should have known that emotional distress would result from his conduct; 2) that the conduct was extreme and outrageous beyond all bounds of decency and utterly intolerable in a civilized community; 3) that the defendant’s conduct caused the plaintiffs distress; and 4) that the plaintiffs emotional distress was severe.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.