640 So. 2d 183 - Pate v. Threlkel’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “DOES A PHYSICIAN OWE A DUTY OF CARE TO THE CHILDREN OF A PATIENT TO WARN THE PATIENT OF THE GENETICALLY TRANSFERABLE NATURE OF THE CONDITION FOR WHICH THE PHYSICIAN IS TREATING THE PATIENT?”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 659 So. 2d 1308 - Werner v. VARNER STAFFORD & SEAMAN · 661 So. 2d 278 - Pate v. Threlkel

2. “[A] physician owes a duty to a minor child who is a member of the immediate family and living with a patient suffering from a contagious disease to inform those charged with the minor's well being of the nature of the contagious disease and the precautionary steps to be taken to prevent the child from contracting such disease and that the duty is not negated by the physician negligently failing to become aware of the presence of such a contagious disease.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 659 So. 2d 1308 - Werner v. VARNER STAFFORD & SEAMAN

3. “we feel constrained by the circumstances of this case and the law as it exists to hold that appellees' conduct in treating Marianne New did not create a foreseeable zone of risk encompassing Heidi Pate, and that the general rule of privity would apply to affirm the trial court's dismissal of the cause.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 661 So. 2d 278 - Pate v. Threlkel