Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 65 N.M. 6 - Ostertag v. Donovan

Ostertag v. Donovan’s Empirical Analysis

1958

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
3
states following
May 1998
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently May 1998

14 state decisions

4019581960197019801990decided

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 Beals ex rel. Walker v. Ares · Brown v. Cobb · Woodbury v. Woodbury · Cardenas v. Ortiz · Matthaei v. Pownall

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

  1. ““We believe the circumstances here establish without a doubt a confidential relationship between this patient and her doctor of the highest sort as a matter of fact and of law. Therefore any gift between the two resulting in a benefit to the doctor is subject to close scrutiny and the doctor carries the burden of proving it was made fairly and without undue influ- * * * ence. “As we view the evidence, we believe there is an absence of full, and satisfactory proof that the gift, was made under circumstances fair in all respects and free of undue influence. * * * “We hold there is substantial evi-. dence to support the findings of the trial court, and that the defend,ant failed to sustain the burden placed upon him by the surrounding circumstances and the patient-physician relationship.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““We think the better view under these circumstances would require a showing of independent advice in a gift of this nature to rebut the presumption that it was unfairly induced. See, 123 A.L.R. 1505 ; Harrison v. Harrison, supra, ( 21 N.M. 372 , 155 P. 356 ); Beals v. Ares, supra, ( 25 N.M. 459 , 185 P. 780 ).””
    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.