561 So. 2d 1371 - Stuka v. Fleming’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 69 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably 633 So. 2d 1210 - Kelty v. Brumfield (1994), 699 So. 2d 365 - Graham v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center (1997)
3 federal appellate · 69 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 Felix v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co. · Sampay v. Morton Salt Co. · Williams on Behalf of Williams v. Kushner · 549 So. 2d 294 - Williams v. Kushner · 534 So. 2d 1331 - Kelty v. Brumfield
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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We recognize that this literal interpretation of the statute affords less rights to the Fund when claims against multiple health care providers are settled than when such claims are tried. In the case of a trial the Fund has the opportunity for reduced exposure when more than one health care provider is determined to be liable. But in the case of a settlement with one health care provider for $100,000 the Fund does not have this opportunity in the subsequent litigation with the victim. However, the Legislature chose in cases of settlement simply to declare the admission of liability by the $100,000 payment of one health care provider and did not provide for the Fund's affirmative right to litigate liability on the part of any other named or unnamed health care providers.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage“In approving a settlement or determining the amount, if any, to be paid from the patient's compensation fund, the court shall consider the liability of the health care provider as admitted and established where the insurer has paid its policy limits of one hundred thousand dollars, or where the self-insured health care provider has paid one hundred thousand dollars.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“(1)The total amount recoverable for all malpractice claims for injuries to or death of a patient, exclusive of future medical care and related benefits as provided in R.S. 40:1299.43, shall not exceed five hundred thousand dollars plus interest and cost. (2) A health care provider qualified under this Part is not liable for an amount in excess of one hundred dollars [$100,000.00] plus interest thereon ... for all malpractice claims because of injuries to or death of any one patient.... (3) (a) Any amount due from a judgment or settlement or from a final award in an arbitration proceeding which is in excess of the total liability of all liable health care providers, as provided in paragraph (2) of this Subsection, shall be paid from the patient’s compensation fund pursuant to the provisions of R.S. 40:1299.44(0). lfi(b) The total amounts paid in accordance with Paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subsection shall not exceed the limitation as provided in Paragraph (1) of this Subsection.”
6 later decisions 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.