Goldstein v. Kaestner’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently September 2010 · most notably Commercial Business Systems, Inc. v. BellSouth Services, Inc. (1995), Duvall, Blackburn, Hale & Downey v. Siddiqui (1992)
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 17 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 104 Wash. 2d 254 - Daugert v. Pappas · Allied Productions, Inc. v. Duesterdick · Phillips v. Clancy · Mullen v. Brantley · Murray v. Hadid
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In order to award lost profits, the trier of fact must have evidence which provides a sufficient basis for estimating profits with reasonable certainty. Boggs v. Duncan, 202 Va. 877, 883 , 121 S.E.2d 359, 363 (1961). However, this does not require the plaintiff to prove an exact monetary amount. As we stated in Murray v. Hadid, 238 Va. 722 , 385 S.E.2d 898 (1989), “[a] plaintiff is not required to prove the exact amount of his damages; however, he is required to show sufficient facts and circumstances to permit a jury to make a reasonable estimate of those damages.” 238 Va. at 731 , 385 S.E.2d at 904 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“is whether the client can prove that, had a timely appeal been filed, as a matter of law the judgment against him would have been reversed....”
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.