Whiteman v. Pitrie’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

160 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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 179 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ * * * The inherent nature of the question is such that it cannot be answered with certainty and exactness. * * * ,|f What are the tests for such abuse of discretion? * * * Affolder v. New York, Chicago & St. L. R. Co., 339 U.S. 96 , 101, 70 S.Ct. 509 , 94 L.Ed. 683 , and ‘so gross or inordinate in amount as to be contrary to right reason’ (Chief Judge Hutcheson concurring in Sunray Oil Corporation v. Allbrit-ton, 5 Cir., 188 F.2d 751 ). * * * When all is said and done, however, the question by its very nature is one for which there can be no rule of thumb answer. * * * ””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pruett v. Marshall · Silverman v. Travelers Insurance

2. “at page 920: It seems clear to us that the verdict was excessive as matter of law and that, in not setting it aside, the district judge abused, indeed transcended, his discretion and committed an error of law. at page 921: While we recognize that a judgment refusing a new trial may not be reversed in this court merely because the verdict is excessive in fact, and have many times held that way, we think it clear that it is the inescapable duty of this court, when, as here, the evidence furnishes no sound basis for the verdict, to reverse a judgment for error of law where the trial court has refused to set the verdict aside. Under that rule, upon these facts and under the circumstances shown here, we think it clear that there was error of law and that it can be corrected only by reversing the cause for excessiveness in law of the verdict and remanding the cause for retrial on the issue of damages.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 695 F. Supp. 845 - Filkins v. McAllister Bros., Inc.

3. “A motion for a new trial is addressed to the trial judge's discretion. He may grant a new trial if he thinks he has committed error; and he may grant one (and he alone can) because he thinks the verdict is wrong, though supported by some evidence. The exercise of his discretion is not ordinarily reviewable on appeal, though a failure to exercise discretion, or an abuse of it, may be corrected.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Silverman v. Travelers Insurance