5 Haw. App. 504 - Leyson v. Steuermann’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably Kaiu v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1992), State Ex Rel. Bronster v. United States Steel Corp. (1996)
3 federal appellate · 30 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 Schloendorff v. Society of the New York Hospital · Canterbury v. Spence · 5 Cal. 3d 98 - Weathers v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Nishi v. Hartwell · Stahl v. Balsara
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) [the physician] owed a duty to disclose to [the patient] the risk of one or more of the collateral injuries that [the patient] suffered; (2) [the physician] breached [his or her] duty; (3) [the patient] suffered injury; and (4) [the physician’s] breach of duty was a cause of [the patient’s] injury in that: (a) [the physician’s] treatment was a substantial factor in bringing about [the patient’s] injury and (b) [the patient], acting rationally and reasonably, would not have undergone the treatment had he [or she] been informed of the risk of the harm that in fact occurred; and (5) no other cause is a superseding cause.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) The condition being treated; (2) The nature and character of the proposed treatment or surgical procedure; (3) The anticipated results; (4) The recognized possible alternative forms of treatment; and (5) The recognized serious possible risks, complications, and anticipated benefits involved in the treatment or surgical procedure, and in the recognized possible alternative forms of treatment, including non-treatment[.]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Generally, an improper appeal by an opposing party to the prejudices and sympathies of the jury is a ground for granting a motion for a new trial where 1) the moving party has been injured by the improper appeal; 2) the moving party took proper steps to preserve his [or her] right to relief; 3) the moving party sought to have the harmful effect of the improper appeal remedied by an appropriate jury instruction; and 4) the effect of the improper appeal was not adequately dissipat ed by the steps taken, 58 Am.Jur.2d New Trial § 59 (1971); cf. Nelson v. Hartman, 199 Mont. 295 , 648 P.2d 1176 (1982); Phil-pott v. Jordan, 572 P.2d 1030 , 280 Or. 803 (1977); Bachran v. Morishige, 52 Haw. 61 , 469 P.2d 808 (1970); or 5) the error was so fundamental that gross injustice would result if a new trial is not granted. 11 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 2805 (1973). These requirements prevent a party “from gambling on the outcome of the jury’s deliberations while secretly preserving the error to be raised on a motion for a new trial in the event of an unfavorable verdict.” Weathers v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, 5 Cal.3d 98, 103 , 95 Cal.Rptr. 516, 519 , 485 P.2d 1132, 1135 (1971). With respect to the allegedly improper remarks by [defendant’s] counsel during opening statement, [plaintiff] did not object to them prior to the verdict. With respect to [defendant’s] allegedly improper testimony, [plaintiffs] only objection prior to the verdict was made on the ground ”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.