Woolley v. Henderson’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably Planned Parenthood League v. Bellotti (1981), Harnish v. Children's Hospital Medical Center (1982)
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 36 state decisions — followed in 17 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 Thompson v. United States · Phelps Dodge Corp. v. AFL-CIO Joint Negotiating Committee · 8 Cal. 3d 229 - Cobbs v. Grant · Schloendorff v. Society of the New York Hospital · Canterbury v. Spence
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It places form over substance to elevate what is essentially a negligence action to the status of an intentional tort based on the fortuity that touching is a necessary incident to treatment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“against the patient's will or substantially at variance with the consent given.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Mayr v. Osborne · In Re Gardner“"We believe that the subjective test is an unsatisfactory gauge for determining causality in informed consent actions and, therefore, in accord with those courts that have squarely addressed this issue, we hold that causation should be judged by an objective standard. E.g., Canterbury v. Spence, supra, 464 F.2d at 790-91 ; Cobbs v. Grant, supra, 8 Cal.3d [229] at 245, 502 P.2d [1] at 11-12, 104 Cal.Rptr. [505] at 515-16 [1972]; Hamilton v. Hardy, 37 Colo.App. 375 , 381, 549 P.2d 1099, 1105 (1976); Funke v. Fieldman, 212 Kan. 524, 535-38 , 512 P.2d 539, 549-50 (1973); Sard v. Hardy, supra, 281 Md. [432] at 447-50, 379 A.2d [1014] at 1024-25 [1977]; Scaria v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 68 Wis.2d 1, 13-16 , 227 N.W.2d 647, 654-55 (1975); see, Aiken v. Clary, supra, 396 S.W.2d [668] at 676 [1965]."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Fain v. Smith
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.