72 N.J. Super. 73 - Raymond v. Cregar’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 2 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Q. Did you have any discussion whatsoever with Dr. Raymond concerning an operation on your mother’s eyes? A. Oh, yes. During the examination the question came up of cataracts. This discussion wasn’t new to me. Every examination she’d go through, then and since, that question has come up as to whether perhaps surgical treatment would improve her vision. I forgot just what Dr. Raymond said, but I assumed he said about the same thing every other ophthalmologist has — that is, that surgery would not improve the situation. I don’t recall exactly what he said at that time. Q. In other words, you have no recollection of Dr. Raymond advising an operation on your mother’s eyes? A. No.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Raymond v. Cregar

2. “It has been held that an action for malicious interference with one’s business is not subject to [N. J. S. A. 2A:14-3], even though the interference consists of the publication of defamatory matter. [72 N. J. Super. at 98]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Henry V. Vaccaro Construction Co. v. A. J. DePace, Inc.