Rickert v. Fraser’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
2 district · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably Sestito v. City of Groton (1979), Childs v. Bainer (1995)
2 district · 30 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 Pierce v. Albanese · Desmarais v. Pinto · Palmieri v. MacEro · Butler v. Steck · Bambus v. Bridgeport Gas 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. . . Litigants have a constitutional right to have issues of fact determined by the jury. The credibility of witnesses and the weight to be accorded to their testimony lie within the province of the jury. The jury had a right to accept part of the testimony and to disregard the remainder. [The court] must decide only whether, on the evidence presented, the jury could have fairly reached the conclusion they did. . . . There is nothing in this case to justify the belief that the jury were influenced by ignorance, prejudice, corruption or partiality. The award of damages was reasonable on a permissible view of the evidence, and the court correctly refused to set aside the verdict. CT Page 5908 (Citations omitted.) Id. at 681 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“conflicting to such an extent that the jury could have refused to credit the plaintiff's claims. . . . [The jury] could also have reasonably concluded that [the plaintiff's] injuries were not permanent and that she exaggerated her pain and suffering.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“jury could have reasonably found ... that the plaintiff had apparently sustained a strain of the neck and a contusion to the low back and that the other claimed injuries, if any, were not proved to have been caused by this accident”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.