1999 Pa. Super. 333 - Armbruster v. Horowitz’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “This Court has repeatedly emphasized that it is not only a[] court’s inherent fundamental and salutary power, but its duty to grant a new trial when it believes the verdict was against the weight of the evidence and resulted in a miscarriage of justice. Although a new trial should not be granted because of a mere conflict in testimony or because the [court] on the same facts would have arrived at a different conclusion, a hew trial should be awarded when the jury’s verdict is so contrary to the evidence as to shock one’s sense of justice and the award of a new trial is imperative so that right may be given another opportunity to prevail.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 2013 Pa. Super. 148 - Empire Trucking Co. v. Reading Anthracite Coal Co.