4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 21 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Ayala v. Murad.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ayala v. Murad Anchor | green | “proximate cause in a medical malpractice case must be established by expert testimony to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, and the causal connection must not be contingent, speculative, or merely possible.” | 8 |
| 2 | Borowski v. Von Solbrig | green | “more probably true than not true” | 5 |
| 3 | Aguilera v. Mount Sinai Hospital Medical Center | green | “without supporting testimony from a neurosurgeon, plaintiff's experts' testimony was insufficient to show that neurosurgery, much less effective neurosurgery, should have occurred absent defendants' negligence.” | 5 |
| 4 | Ayala v. Murad | green | “must be established by expert testimony to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, and the causal connection must not be contingent, speculative, or merely possible.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.