Bradner v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 100 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 108 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Philip Morris, Inc. v. Emerson (1988), Infant C. v. Boy Scouts of America, Inc. (1990)
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 100 state decisions
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 Selected Risks Insurance v. Dean · Rawle v. McIlhenny · Rome v. Kelly Springfield Tire Co. · Brown v. Huddleston · Cheatham v. Gregory
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 108 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where [the] evidence [of special damages] is uncontroverted and so complete that no rational fact-finder could disregard it ... it must be considered as a fixed constituent part of the verdict. Where the remainder of the award consists of an amount which appears to the court insufficient to compensate the plaintiff for [the] non-monetary element of damages ... where such are proven, the verdict should be set aside as inadequate.”
18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“bears no reasonable relation to the damages suggested by the facts in the case, and is manifestly out of line and at variance with the facts....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We have repeatedly held that although a trier of fact must determine the weight of the testimony and the credibility of the witnesses, it may not arbitrarily disregard uncontradicted evidence of unimpeached witnesses which is not inherently incredible and not inconsistent with facts in the record, even though such witnesses are interested in the outcome of the case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hansen v. McFarland
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.