Labofish v. Berman’s Empirical Analysis
55 F.2d 1022 · 1932
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently December 1994 · most notably Sher v. De Haven (1952), Bowman v. Redding & Co. (1971)
20 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 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 Hennessy v. Metropolitan Life Insurance · McKinstry v. Collins · State v. McDonald · 243 Ill. App. 109 - Hamer v. Globe Mutual Life Insurance
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * *. as has been heretofore stated a number of times, * * * under the District of Columbia statute on the subject, a physician may not be permitted to testify (except by the consent of the patient or his legal representatives) as to any matter which has come to his knowledge strictly out of his professional .relationship to the patient. * * * We do not understand this language to make the physician ineligible as a witness under all circumstances, for instance, we think it clear that he may testify as to his employment by the patient * * *. But as to all knowledge or information acquired by him through disclosures made by the patient,' as well as information obtained through his observation or examination of the patient and to all inferences and conclusions drawn therefrom, we think the statute seals his lips, and this because the relationship of itself is and ought to be in its nature confidential.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sher v. De Haven“[Counsel for plaintiffs] : May I ask your honor another question in this line? As to observations, if the doctor learned of these, what view does the Court take of the things the doctor learned because of the relationship? THE COURT: Well, the statute and the cases appear to be clear that information confidential in its nature ac quired in a professional capacity necessary to enable him to act in that capacity is what is excluded. We will have to deal with that on a question-by-question basis.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Logan v. Washington“[W]e think they may be offered in evidence for the purpose of proving, prima facie, the time, place, and cause of death.”
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.