Patel v. Barker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Barker was diagnosed with a malignancy in her colon and referred to Patel for surgery. Patel performed the surgery, which involved resectioning the colon. During this surgery, Patel used hemoeclips to control bleeding. At some point following the surgery, it was discovered that Barker's colon was leaking into her abdominal cavity at the point of reattachment. Patel performed a see-ond surgery to create a colostomy. Later, doctors discovered that a he-moclip had been left on Barker's ureter. A colorectal surgeon and a urological surgeon then performed a third surgery to remove the hemoclip and reverse the colostomy. Barker filed a suit for medical malpractice against Patel. At trial, Barker claimed that Patel breached the standard of care in two ways: by suturing the colon in such a way that it leaked and by leaving a hemoclip on her ureter. The case was tried to a jury, which awarded Barker $1,800,000 in damages. The trial court reduced the award to $1,500,000, in compliance with the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act limitation of $750,000 in damages per act of malpractice.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Medical Assurance of Indiana v. McCarty

2. “[The Medical Malpractice Act] authorizes only one recovery in those cases where a single injury exists, irrespective of the number of acts causing the injury. Conversely, there is no dispute that, if there are two separate and distinct injuries caused by two separate occurrences of malpractice, the statute does not preclude two separate recoveries (each separately limited in accordance with the Act).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Csicsko v. Hill

3. “the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act allows for one recovery for each distinct act of malpractice that results in a distinct injury, even if the multiple acts of malpractice occur in the same procedure.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Csicsko v. Hill