53 N.J. Super. 27 - Toy v. Rickert’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently January 1988 · most notably Buckelew v. Grossbard (1981), Sanzari v. Rosenfeld (1961)
29 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 Bornstein v. Metropolitan Bottling Co., Inc. · Carbone v. Warburton · Hull v. Plume · 22 N.J. Super. 5 - Carbone v. Warburton · 32 N.J. Super. 67 - Steinke v. Bell
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For us to conclude that the occurrence, in a medical malpractice action, bespeaks negligence, we must first determine that the common knowledge or experience of ordinary laymen is such that they can infer that the harm would not have eventuated but for the negligence of defendant.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The practice of medicine concerns itself with a relatively inexact science. There are many variables and imponderables concerning hypodermic injections which are not within the common knowledge and experience of men. These factors lend meaning to the ordinary rules which require expert proof of the standard practice and deviation therefrom in cases such as this. We conclude that the instant matter is not a proper case for invoking the aid of the doctrine because it lacks the first essential requirement. We cannot say that the occurrence here ordinarily bespeaks negligence. For aught that a layman could properly infer, the damaging effect of this injection might well have ensued, consistently with the exercise of ordinary professional care by defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“hypodermic needle in an unorthodox manner or at a site which is not considered orthodox or proper.”
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.