Bedgood v. Madalin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 federal appellate · 36 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “This court has recognized previously that injuries to the familial relationship are significant injuries and are worthy of compensation. In Whittlesey v. Miller, 572 S.W.2d 665, 668 (Tex.1978), we held that either spouse has a cause of action for loss of consortium suffered as a result of an injury to the other spouse by a tortfeasor’s negligence. We held that loss of affection, solace, comfort, companionship, society, assistance, and sexual relations were real, direct and personal losses and said that these losses were not too intangible or conjectural to be measured in pecuniary terms. Id. at 667 . A.parent’s claim for damages for the loss of companionship of a child is closely analogous to the loss of consortium, cause of action created in Whittlesey . In Selders v. Armentrout [ 190 Neb. 275 ], 207 N.W.2d 686, 689 (Neb.1973), the Nebraska Supreme Court noted this analogy with loss of consortium and said, “There is no logical reason for treating an injury to the family relationship resulting from the wrongful death of a child more restrictively.” Id. 651 S.W.2d at 252 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Gulf States Utilities Co. v. Reed

2. “A plaintiff should be permitted to prove medically the damages resulting from a tortfeasor’s negligent infliction of emotional trauma. The damages recoverable, however, should be for actual mental injuries rather than mere fear, anger, or sorrow. In most instances the normal grief reaction will result in little or no actual mental injury, and the damages suffered will be minimal or nonexistent. When the emotional trauma results in depression or other secondary reactions, however, the plaintiff should recover for the damages incurred.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Hawkins v. Walker

3. “It is well settled that under the Texas Wrongful Death Act a surviving parent is entitled to recover as actual damages for the death of a child only the pecuniary value of the child’s services until he reaches his majority, less the cost and expense of the child’s care, support, education and maintenance, and such sums as might be reasonably expected as con tributions after the child reached majority.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Solis v. Garcia