Gulley v. Mayo Foundation’s Empirical Analysis
886 F.2d 161 · 1989
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 3 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently January 2016 · most notably Media Duplication Services, Ltd. v. HDG Software, Inc. (1991), Williams v. Leach (1991)
18 federal appellate · 3 district · 6 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 Offerdahl v. University of Minnesota Hospitals & Clinics · Grondahl v. Bulluck · Combs v. Nick Garin Trucking · Armco, Inc. v. Penrod-Stauffer Building Systems, Inc. · Norlock v. City of Garland
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) when the summons is served upon that defendant, or (b) at the date of acknowledgement of service if service is made by mail, or (c) when the summons is delivered to the sheriff in the county where the defendant resides for service; but such delivery shall be ineffectual unless within 60 days thereafter the summons is actually served on that defendant or the first publication thereof is made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the alleged malpractice consists of a single act which is complete at a precise time, which no continued course of treatment can cure or relieve, and where the plaintiff is actually aware of the facts upon which the claim is based.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he provisions of [Rule 4] are to be strictly complied with . . . therefore, if the acknowledgment form is not returned, the formal requirements of mail service are not met and personal service must be obtained.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Patricia Larsen
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.