Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 941 S.W.2d 96 - Diaz v. Westphal

Diaz v. Westphal’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
3
states following
June 2021
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 59 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably KPMG Peat Marwick v. Harrison County Housing Finance Corp. (1999), Horizon/CMS Healthcare Corporation v. Auld (2000)

7 federal appellate · 59 state decisions

3001997200020102020decided

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 Court of Appeals, 13th District)

Relationships

Relies on Nixon v. Mr. Property Management Co. · Moreno v. Sterling Drug, Inc. · S.V. v. R.V. · Sax v. Votteler · Delgado v. Burns

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

  1. “[a]ll courts shall be open, and every person for a injury done him, in his lands, goods, person or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Notwithstanding any other law, no health care liability claim may be commenced unless the action is filed within two years from the occurrence of the breach or tort or from the date the medical or health care treatment that is the subject of the claim or the hospitalization for which the claim is made is completed.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “first show a cognizable, common-law claim that article 4590i’s limitations provision restricts. Then, the litigant must show the restriction is unreasonable or arbitrary when balanced against the statute’s purpose and basis. The limitations provision in article 4590i section 10.01 does not violate the open courts guarantee if the plaintiff had a reasonable opportunity to discover the alleged wrong and bring suit before the limitations period expired.”
    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.