Neidhardt v. Siverts’s Empirical Analysis
1960
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently May 2021
2 federal appellate · 11 state decisions
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 Bogue v. Gunderson · Gee v. Culver · Turner v. Emerson Electric Manufacturing Co.
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If the size of the verdict in relation to the injury sustained is so excessive as to demonstrate to the court that the jury has been misled by passion or prejudice in determining the amount of damages, the trial court should grant a new trial or reduce the verdict, * *”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The social standing of the parties, the place where the assault occurs, the character of the persons present, the provocation, if any — all the circumstances — are to be considered. The question is not whether the trial court or this court, as triers of fact, would have awarded a less amount. Unless the verdict is so large as to clearly indicate that it must have been given under the influence of passion or prejudice, it should stand.” Neidhardt, supra, 103 N.W.2d at 103 , quoting Bogue v. Gunderson, 30 S.D. 1 , 137 N.W. 595, 596 (1912).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dahlen v. Landis““The evidence is such that the jury could have found that the defendant committed the three deliberate acts in total disregard of the plaintiffs rights. It warrants a finding that he hauled some of the hay to his own farmyard and appropriated it, some he scattered about the field, and another portion he pushed over a bank and into the brush where it could not be recovered by the plaintiff after he found it. Some of the acts the defendant tried to explain, others he denied, but his credibility was for the jury.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Remmick v. Mills
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.