Horn v. Perry’s Empirical Analysis
1940
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
May 1952
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Lœwenthal v. Streng · Ft. Smith & W. Ry. Co. v. Hutchinson · Todd v. Webb · C. O. G. Railroad Co. v. Deperade · Olson v. Northern Pacific Railway 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘In some jurisdictions, however, it has become the judicial custom in cases of a fatally excessive verdict, where the right to recover is clear, whether the error is -attributable to perversity or not, and whether the defendant does or does not consent, to permit the plaintiff to terminate the controversy without the expense of a new trial by consenting to take judgment for an amount sufficiently under that named by the jury to cure such error in the judgment of the court; and also to permit the defendant in such a situation to terminate the litigation, whether the plaintiff is willing or not, by consenting to judgment for a sum sufficiently less than the verdict, in the judgment of the court, to cure the error.’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Craft v. Myers““ ‘Where the excess is a certain and definite sum which can be ascertained by the court without assuming the functions of a jury, there is no question as to the power to order a remittitur. * * *’ “In most jurisdictions the rule is expressed that where there is an excessive verdict due solely to error of judgment rather than to prejudice or passion, such verdict is held curable by remittitur.” (Citing cases.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Craft v. Myers““The question is,"in the case at bar, whether when a jury clearly errs in arriving at the value of the property in a replevin action, can the court change the value to meet the cause of justice? We think it can. It is in effect ordering a remittitur. The right of the trial court in its discretion to order a remittitur or grant a new trial has been generally recognized.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Craft v. Myers
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.