Webb v. Jorns’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 125 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 129 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 111 Ill. 2d 229 - Purtill v. Hess (1986), King Ranch, Inc. v. Chapman (2003)
2 federal appellate · 125 state decisions
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 Benoit v. Wilson · McEwen v. Harrison · Ford v. Panhandle & Santa Fe Railway Co. · Nardis Sportswear v. Simmons · Bowles v. Bourdon
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 129 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he court, by its order dismissing the hospital, correctly followed the rule that the amended petition, by omitting a defendant, operated as a voluntary dismissal as to that party. [Citations omitted]. The trial court erred, however, in dismissing the cause “with prejudice.’ The voluntary dismissal of the hospital did not prevent plaintiffs from refiling an action against the hospital, and the phrase, ‘with prejudice,’ improperly barred such an action. [Citations omitted]. Some of the plaintiffs were minors against whom the statute of limitations may not have run, and the dismissal “with prejudice’ as to them was in error. ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Green v. Vidlak“The community standard rule does not require a small office of a rural medical practitioner to possess either the skills or equipment of a sophisticated clinic; but the standard demands, at least, that one must exercise ordinary care commensurate with the equipment, skills and time available. A trial court has discretion in the administration of the community standard. Any other treatment of the rule would mean that some communities would be measured by standards which fall beneath those universally regarded as ordinary medical standards.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hickson v. Martinez““. . . The order of October 28,1970, dismissing the hospital was an interlocutory order, because it did not dispose of all parties and issues in the pending suit. Since the trial court did not sever the cause against the hospital from the rest of the case, the interlocutory judgment did not become a final judgment until it was merged into the final judgment which the court rendered on January 18, 1971, disposing of the whole case. . . ””
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.