Convalescent Services, Inc. v. Schultz’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently June 2011
9 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 295th Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. Haslip · Mississippi v. Turner · Transportation Insurance Co. v. Moriel · Kindred v. Con/Chem, Inc. · Honda Motor Co. v. Oberg
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Q: When viewed objectively from Coastal’s point of view at the tune of the September '93 incident, in your opinion, did Coastal’s failure to stop using probes that could have creepy-crawler problems, did that involve a high degree of risk, considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others? A: Yes, it did, very high. Q: In your opinion, Mr. Atkinson, did both the magnitude and the probability of the anticipated injury to somebody like Crown Central Petroleum Corporation, if an overspill occurred due to a creepy-crawler problem, involve a likelihood of serious injuries? A: Yes, sir, absolutely. Q: In your opinion, did Coastal have an actual subjective awareness of the risk involved in failing to stop using probes that can have creepy-crawler problems? A: Yes, again and again. Q: And in your opinion, did Coastal nevertheless proceed with conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others? A: That’s the only conclusion I can draw. With all of the evidence as a whole and not just nit-picking along, if we look at the whole picture of what everybody in Coastal, from the very top, the president, all the way down to the bottom knew, that that’s the only conclusion I can draw, because, you see, the character of the king permeates the kingdom. So what the top man does and says is what the guy down at the bottom’s going to do. He’s going to emulate that.”
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.