Van Gordon v. Beaver’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[ejncompasses two separate claims. The first involves an action against the tortfea-sor for those damages that are “non-recoverable” under Minnesota’s workers’ compensation law — namely, damages for “pain and suffering, general disability, embarrassment, disfigurement, and mental anguish. * * * * As a second component of the plaintiffs action, she is statutorily authorized to prosecute a claim, which includes her employer/insurer’s subrogation interest against the tortfeasor * * *. Quite logically, this latter claim is limited to those damages which are “recoverable” under the workers’ compensation laws — such as those for past and future medical expenses, past and future wage loss, and loss of future earning capacity.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sayre v. McGOUGH CONST. CO., INC.