Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 55 Or. App. 801 - Ladd v. Hikes

55 Or. App. 801 - Ladd v. Hikes’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
January 2016
most recently cited

2 district · 4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Hunter v. Straube · McCallum v. Asbury · North Pacific Lumber Co. v. Oliver

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

  1. “I would prefer to base my dissent on the ground that a covenant not to compete between or among members of the medical profession is not enforceable as a matter of public policy. However, the majority is correct in saying that the Supreme Court has upheld a covenant, essentially identical to the one here involved, between partners in the same medical clinic as these plaintiffs, where the clinic sought enforcement against a withdrawing partner. McCallum v. As bury, 238 Or. 257 , 393 P.2d 774 (1964). Others, too, have been approved. Hunter v. Straube, 273 Or. 720 , 543 P.2d 278 (1976 [1975]). We are not free to overrule those cases, but, I am hopeful the Supreme Court will reconsider them and adopt a public policy for this state recognizing that the medical profession is affected with a public interest which precludes its members from agreeing among themselves that one or more of them may not fill the public need for his, her or their services in a given community.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “The opinions of the Supreme Court upholding such provisions in a medical contract are binding upon this court. Until such time as that court proscribes such provisions as being contrary to public policy when used by the medical profession, this court will enforce them. Under the factual findings of the trial court, differentiated from his legal conclusions, we see no reason not to enforce the provision.”
    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.