Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 221 F.3d 701 - Tracy Parker Streber

Tracy Parker Streber’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
7
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

2 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Alexander v. Turtur & Associates, Inc. (2004), Bellino v. McGrath North Mullin & Kratz, PC LLO (2007)

2 district · 11 state decisions

230200020102020decided

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 International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. · Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty. · Transportation Insurance Co. v. Moriel

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

  1. “A judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) should be granted by the trial court only when the facts and inferences point so strongly and overwhelmingly in favor of the moving party that reasonable jurors could not arrive at a contrary verdict, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion is made, and giving that party the advantage of every fair and reasonable inference which the evidence justifies. In doing so, however, the court must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party, and it may not make credibility determinations or weigh the evidence. Credibility determinations, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of legitimate inferences from the facts are jury functions, not those of a judge. Thus, although the court should review the record as a whole, it must disregard all evidence favorable to the moving party that the jury is not required to believe. That is, the court should give credence to the evidence favoring the nonmovant as well as that evidence supporting the moving party that is uncontradicted and unim-peached, at least to the extent that that evidence comes from disinterested witnesses.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[o]n each issue, `we will not disturb the jury's verdict unless, considering the evidence in the light most favorable to [the prevailing party], the facts and inferences point so overwhelmingly to [the non-prevailing party] that reasonable jurors could not have arrived at a verdict except in [their] favor.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A]sking for `interest differential' is not asking to keep the money earned on the [amount owed for taxes] while possessing it unlawfully; rather, it is asking to pay only the interest earned while possessing it unlawfully and not be penalized for conservative investing.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.