DiFilippo v. Beck’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 district · 7 state decisions

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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Without question the panel procedures required by the Act fall within requirements of Mathews v. Eldridge. However, the Court need not even consider the procedures mandated for the review panel in order to find that the admission of the panel’s opinion in the trial of this case would not violate the due process guarantee. This is so because the parties are given a full opportunity to litigate their positions before the jury where they will be able to adduce contrary evidence, refute the evidence relied upon by the panel, and cross-examine any witnesses relied upon by the panel. The panel’s opinion, although prima facie evidence, is not conclusive. Thus, the procedures for a review panel, [sic] are, by analogy, no more than the appointment of a neutral expert at a party’s request. The admissibility of such an “expert’s” opinion, which can be fully challenged before the jury, clearly does not violate due process.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Keyes v. Humana Hospital Alaska, Inc.

2. “Upon receipt of a motion for review, ... the Court shall review the panel’s opinion on the record made before the panel and shall strike any portion of the panel’s opinion which the Court finds to be based on error of law or not supported by substantial evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. DiFilippo v. Beck

3. “both holdings of Wheeler were effectively overruled in Feinstein”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Aumand v. Dartmouth Hitchcock