72 F. Supp. 2d 635 - Mitchell v. Hayes’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
2 district · 5 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Ida Maxwell Wells v. G. Gordon Liddy, Phillip MacKin Bailley, Movant · Schickling v. Aspinall · Hottle v. Beech Aircraft Corp. · Dillingham v. Hall
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘Discounting is a reality of modem medical economics and it does no violence to the collateral source doctrine to bring the tort compensation system the same extended savings. By allowing the plaintiff to show the discounted medical expenses as evidence of his damages, even though he paid no part of them, but refusing any evidence of the write-offs that no one incurred, there is a proper balance of the competing interests at issue.’ ” Strahley, 2000 WL 1745291 , at .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.