5 Cal. 4th 1172 - Arato v. Avedon’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
88 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 105 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably American Academy of Pediatrics v. Lungren (1997), 25 Cal. App. 4th 836 - Jambazian v. Borden (1994)
88 state decisions — followed in 12 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 8 Cal. 3d 229 - Cobbs v. Grant · Schloendorff v. Society of the New York Hospital · 51 Cal. 3d 120 - Moore v. Regents of University of California · Canterbury v. Spence · Natanson v. Kline
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 105 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a patient may validly waive the right to be informed”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the proper, albeit limited, role of expert testimony in informed consent cases,” even as to the adequacy of the disclosure (element 1)). Those cases requiring expert medical evidence as to proximate causation fail to clearly distinguish between what must be shown to prove a causal connection in an informed consent action and what must be shown to prove that same connection in an”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he fact that a physician has fiducial obligations which . . . prohibit misrepresenting the nature of the patient's medical condition, does not mean that he or she is under a duty, the scope of which is undefined, to disclose every contingency that might affect the patient's nonmedical rights and interests”
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.