141 Ind. App. 190 - THOMPSON, ETC. v. Owen’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 state decisions

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

1. ““When there is a total absence of evidence or legitimate inference in favor of the plaintiff upon an essential issue; or where the evidence is without conflict and is susceptible ' of but one inference and that inference is in favor of the ■ defendant (citations omitted). “When there is some evidence or legitimate inference supporting each material allegation of the complaint, the court will not weigh the conflicting evidence or inferences but will consider only the evidence and inferences that are most favorable to the party against whom the motion for a peremporty verdict is directed (citations ■" omitted). “In determining whether a peremptory instruction should be given the court must accept as true all facts which the evidence tends to prove and draw, against the party requesting such instruction, all inferences which the jury might reasonably draw” (citations omitted). See also: Thompson v. Owen (1966), 141 Ind. App. 190 , 218 N. E. 2d 351 ; Huttinger v. G. C. Murphy Company (1961), 131 Ind. App. 642 , 172 N. E. 2d 74 (transfer denied).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 142 Ind. App. 677 - RUSH ET UX. v. Clinger · 143 Ind. App. 119 - Ecoff v. Central Indiana Gas Co.