224 W. Va. 483 - Jones v. Setser’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"`"[g]reat latitude is allowed counsel in argument of cases, but counsel must keep within the evidence, not make statements calculated to inflame, prejudice or mislead the jury, nor permit or encourage witnesses to make remarks which would have a tendency to inflame, prejudice or mislead the jury." Syl. pt. 2, State v. Kennedy, 162 W.Va. 244 , 249 S.E.2d 188 (1978).' Syl. pt. 8, Mackey v. Irisari, 191 W.Va. 355 , 445 S.E.2d 742 (1994)." Syllabus point 1, Lacy v. CSX Transportation, Inc., 205 W.Va. 630 , 520 S.E.2d 418 (1999).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Perrine v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. · 225 W. Va. 482 - Perrine v. EI DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND CO.

2. “cumulated prejudicial effects on the jury that arose through the viewing of the cartoon, being subjected to disparaging remarks about plaintiffs counsel and expert witness, and from the wrongful appeal to the local passions and concerns of the jurors.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 225 W. Va. 482 - Perrine v. EI DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND CO.

3. “personalized the effects of his rhetoric though the use of demonstrative aids to argue that both [counsel and the expert] were intent on pursuing claims of medical malpractice regardless of whether such claims had merit.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 225 W. Va. 482 - Perrine v. EI DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND CO.