White v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
2 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently September 2015
2 district · 10 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 Rawlings v. Apodaca · Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co. · Linthicum v. Nationwide Life Insurance · Hawkins v. Allstate Insurance · Bradshaw v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
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.
“We reject [defendant’s] argument that [plaintiff] failed to introduce sufficient evidence from which the jury could have determined an appropriate amount of punitive damages to award against him. Contrary to [defendant’s] argument, Hawkins v. Allstate Insurance Co., 152 Ariz. 490 , 733 P.2d 1073 [, cert. denied, 484 U.S. 874 , 108 S.Ct. 212 , 98 L.Ed.2d 177 ] (1987) does not require specific proof of [defendant's] ‘wealth, property, income, education, earning capacity, debts, savings, or credit.’ The plaintiff, in a punitive damages case, need only introduce evidence sufficient to allow the trier of fact to calculate an award that is reasonable under the circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Elliott v. Videan
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.