Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 204 SO2D 466 - Gregory ex rel. Gregory v. Patrick

Gregory ex rel. Gregory v. Patrick’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
August 1993
most recently cited

3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently August 1993

3 state decisions

301967197019801990decided

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 Dixon v. Breland · Roy v. Hammett Motors, Inc.

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

  1. “The sum awarded is less than the medical and hospital expenses. The plaintiff’s injuries, though not grave, were doubtless accompanied by pain and suffering for which she is entitled to damages. It is clear that where there is no showing of contributory negligence the question of the existence of passion or prejudice must be resolved by contrasting the uncontradicted showing of the entire damage with the amount of the verdict. Dixon v. Breland, 192 Miss. 335 , 6 So.2d 122 (1942). By indulging this contrast it is apparent that the verdict of the jury was less than the proven actual damages exclusive of pain and suffering. We hold, therefore, that the verdict of the jury evinces bias, passion or prejudice and that the lower court erred in overruling the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial; and thus, the cause must be remanded for a new trial upon the question of damages alone.”
    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.