77 Ill. 2d 279 - Dolan v. Galluzzo’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 3 district · 79 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably 111 Ill. 2d 229 - Purtill v. Hess (1986), 176 Ill. 2d 1 - Advincula v. United Blood Services (1996)
4 federal appellate · 3 district · 79 state decisions
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 33 Ill. 2d 326 - Darling v. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital · 72 Ill. 2d 249 - Walski v. Tiesenga · 60 Ill. 2d 418 - Borowski v. Von Solbrig · Hart v. Van Zandt · 72 Ill. 2d 203 - People v. Park
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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We simply are not disposed to provide for what, in effect, may result in a higher standard of care when the legislature, by recognizing various schools of medicine, has not done so. To do so would not only be unfair to podiatrists (i.e., to allow practitioners of other schools to testify regarding the standard of care podiatrists owe), but it would also assume that science and medicine have achieved a universal standard of treatment of disease or injury. Such is not the case.” 77 Ill. 2d at 284 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The rationale of the general rule restricting expert testimony regarding the standard of care owed by a practitioner of a certain school of medicine is that ‘there are different schools of medicine with varying tenets and practices, and that inequities would be occasioned by testing the care and skill of a practitioner of one school of medicine by the opinion of a practitioner of another school.’ [Citation.] The practitioner of a particular school of medicine is entitled to have his conduct tested by the standards of his school.” 77 Ill. 2d 279, 283 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he practitioner of a particular school of medicine is entitled to have his conduct tested by the standards of his school.”
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.