10 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 48 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 Roach v. Springfield Clinic.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Roach v. Springfield Clinic Anchor | green | “is to ensure that members of the medical profession will effectively engage in self-evaluation of their peers in the interest of advancing the quality of health care.” | 10 |
| 2 | Niven v. Siqueira | green | “to encourage candid and voluntary studies and programs used to improve hospital conditions and patient care or to reduce the rates of death and disease.” | 8 |
| 3 | Roach v. Springfield Clinic | green | “if the simple act of furnishing a committee with earlier-acquired information were sufficient to cloak that information with the statutory privilege, a hospital could effectively insulate from disclosure virtually all adverse facts known to its medical staff, with the exception …” | 6 |
| 4 | Berry v. West Suburban Hospital Medical Center | green | “unless it is against the manifest weight of the evidence.” | 6 |
| 5 | Niven v. Siqueira | green | “encourage candid and voluntary studies and programs used to improve hospital conditions and patient care or to reduce the rates of death and disease.” | 5 |
| 6 | Flannery v. Lin | green | “a contempt citation is an appropriate method for testing the propriety of a discovery order.” | 4 |
| 7 | Flannery v. Lin | green | “they must be taken as true notwithstanding the existence of contrary unsupported allegations.” | 4 |
| 8 | Toth v. Jensen | green | “documents which arise from the workings of a peer-review committee and which are an integral part, but not the result, of the peer-review process.” | 2 |
| 9 | Ardisana v. Northwest Community Hospital, Inc. | green | “protect against disclosure of information generated before a peer-review process begins or after it ends.” | 2 |
| 10 | Toth v. Jensen | green | “which are an integral part, but not the result, of the peer-review process.” | 1 |
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.