Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 91 N.H. 499 - Michael v. Roberts

Michael v. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis

1941

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
6
states following
July 2013
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently July 2013 · most notably 37 Cal. 2d 465 - Huffman v. Lindquist (1951), Mehigan v. Sheehan (1947)

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 17 state decisions

11019411950196019701980199020002010decided

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 April v. Peront

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

  1. “Dr. Domizio Costa, a surgeon residing in Revere, Massachusetts, was called by the plaintiff as an expert and was asked certain questions as to the propriety of the treatment in this case and the possibility of other treatment. These questions were excluded by the Presiding Justice as a matter of discretion, subject to the plaintiff's exception. It cannot be said as a matter of law that there was error in these rulings. Although Dr. Costa resided in Revere, Massachusetts, a city on the evidence comparable in size to Rochester, he testified that his practice was largely in Boston, and it was properly to be found that he was really a Boston surgeon. Since `a person who holds himself out as practicing a particular profession is only required to possess the knowledge and to exercise the care and skill of the ordinary practitioner of that profession in the same place or in similar localities,' ( April v. Peront, 88 N.H. 309 , 188 A. 457, 458 ) the opinion of a Boston surgeon as to what Dr. Roberts might or ought to have done was not receivable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.