Kline v. Yokom’s Empirical Analysis
117 F.2d 370 · 1941
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Sterling-Midland Coal Co. v. Great Lakes Coal & Coke Co. · Cabrera v. American Colonial Bank · Fuchs & Lang Manufacturing Co. v. R. J. Kittredge & Co. · Telluride Power Transmission Co. v. Crane Co. · Honeyman v. Jarvis
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Finally it is contended that the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was not seasonably made. Rule 50(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. As before noted on April 26, 1940, at the close of all the evidence, Yokom presented his written motion for a directed verdict, which was taken subject to the verdict of the jury. After the return of the special verdicts a hearing on the motion for a directed verdict was considered by the court on May 17, 1940, at which time counsel for Yokom, by leave, of court, presented an amended motion for a directed verdict. We are of the opinion the point is not well taken. The motion which was sustained was the same motion in amended form, which had been presented at the close of all the evidence and upon which the trial court reserved his ruling. “We think the judgment of the District Court was right. It is therefore affirmed.””
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.