MacDonald v. Clinger’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 4 district · 54 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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Disclosure of confidential information by a psychiatrist to a spouse will be justified whenever there is a danger to the patient, the spouse or another person”). Given our resolution of this appeal, we do not consider whether, as the defendants argued at trial, disclosure of Mr. Garby's confidences to his wife when they did not believe he was an immediate danger to himself would have risked breaching their ethical duties. . The dissent mistakenly treats Mrs. Garby's concentration on the issue of”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Chizmar v. MacKie · Garby v. George Washington University Hospital

2. “Any time a doctor undertakes the treatment of a patient, and the consensual relationship of physician and patient is established, two jural obligations (of significance here) are simultaneously assumed by the doctor. Doctor and patient enter into a simple contract, the patient hoping that he will be cured and the doctor optimistically assuming that he will be compensated. As an implied condition of that contract, this Court is of the opinion that the doctor warrants that any confidential information gained through the relationship will not be released without the patient’s permission. Almost every member of the public is aware of the promise of discretion contained in the Hippocratic Oath, and every patient has a right to rely upon this warranty of silence. The promise of secrecy is as much an express warranty as the advertisement of a commercial entrepreneur. Consequently, when a doctor breaches his duty of secrecy, he is in violation of part of his obligations under the contract.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Stubbs v. North Memorial Medical Center

3. “Research reveals few cases in American jurisprudence which treat the doctor-patient privilege in this context. That is undoubtedly due to the fact that confidentiality of the relationship is a cardinal rule of the medical profession, faithfully adhered to in most instances, and thus has come to be justifiably relied upon by patients seeking advice and treatment. This physician-patient relationship is contractual in nature, whereby the physician, in agreeing to administer to the patient, impliedly covenants that the disclosure necessary to diagnosis and treatment of the patient’s mental or physical condition will be kept in confidence. Examination of cases which have addressed this problem makes it apparent that courts have immediately recognized a legally compensable injury in such wrongful disclosure based on a variety of grounds for recovery: public policy; right to privacy; breach of contract-breach of fiduciary duty.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 809 F. Supp. 1020 - Doe v. Blake