Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 92 N.M. 187 - White v. Sutherland

White v. Sutherland’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

64
cited by 64 later decisions
10
states following
May 2008
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 59 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently May 2008 · most notably 277 Pa. Super. 70 - Shearer v. Moore (1980), Strickland v. Roosevelt County Rural Electric Cooperative (1982)

1 federal appellate · 59 state decisions — followed in 10 states

2401978198019902000decided

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 Springer Corporation v. Herrera · Doe Ex Rel. Doe v. Heim · Hedgebeth v. Medford · Herrera v. Springer Corporation · United States v. James F. Merrigan and James F. Merrigan, Jr., and Third-Party v. Thomas J. McKinney Third-Party

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

  1. “'Absent a clearly expressed legislative intent requiring otherwise, "subrogated”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““There is no basis, however, for concluding that the Legislature did not intend by its very careful use of the term ‘subrogation’ to import the equitable incidénces of that remedy. As we pointed out, that doctrine is distinctively equitable in nature and is generally understood to mean that a party entitled to the right of sub-rogation should bear or share the reasonable costs which have been incurred in bringing that right to fruition.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““When the department makes medical assistance payments in behalf of a recipient, the department is subrogated to any right of the recipient against a third party for recovery of medical expenses to the extent that the department has made payment.””
    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.