Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 659 NE2D 516 - Hughes v. Glaese

Hughes v. Glaese’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
3
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently November 2018

22 state decisions

80199520002010decided

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 Guy v. SCHULDT · Oelling v. Rao · Rohrabaugh Ex Rel. Cross v. Wagoner · Havens v. Ritchey · Adams v. Luros

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

  1. “'The physician's failure to disclose that which he knows, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, constitutes constructive fraud.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “'caleulated to mislead and hinder [him] from obtaining information by the use of ordinary diligence, or to prevent inquiry or elude investigation.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “When the special medical malpractice statute of limitations is being asserted, and the provider has intentionally withheld or concealed from a patient important medical information of which the physician has actual knowledge, a fact-finder may reasonably infer a health care provider’s intent to hinder discovery, prevent inquiry, and elude investigation. Such conduct by a physician would satisfy the active concealment branch of the fraudulent concealment doctrine.”
    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.