Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 N.M. 181 - Armijo v. Tandysh

Armijo v. Tandysh’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
6
states following
January 2005
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently January 2005 · most notably 36 Cal. 3d 359 - American Bank & Trust Co. v. Community Hospital (1984), 136 Ill. 2d 450 - Hayes v. Mercy Hospital & Medical Center (1990)

50 state decisions

300198219902000decided

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 79 Ill. 2d 295 - Anderson v. Wagner · McGeehan v. Bunch · Howell Ex Rel. Howell v. Burk · Stang v. Hertz Corporation · Melon v. State

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

  1. “No claim for malpractice arising out of an act of malpractice which occurred subsequent to the effective date of the Medical Malpractice Act ... may be brought against a health care provider unless filed within three years after the date that the act of malpractice occurred....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Section 41-5-3(C), N.M.S.A. 1978, defines a malpractice claim as including “any cause of action arising in this state against a health care provider * * * whether the patient’s claim or cause of action sounds in tort or contract, and includes but is not limited to actions based on battery or wrongful death”. The specific inclusion of a wrongful death claim within the definition of a malpractice claim makes the limitation period of § 41-5-13, supra, applicable to plaintiff’s claim. The reason is that this specific inclusion controls over the general limitation period for a wrongful death claim. Hopper v. Board of County Commissioners, 84 N.M. 604 , 506 P.2d 348 (Ct.App.1973).”
    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.