Toombs v. Hayes’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. “Recently, in Bowers v. Sprouse, 254 Va 428, 492 S.E.2d 637 (1997), decided after the trial court ruled in the present case, we held that “a jury award in a personal injury action which compensates a plaintiff for the exact amount of the plaintiff’s medical expenses and other special damages is inadequate as a matter of law, irrespective of whether those damages were controverted.” Id at 431, 492 S.E.2d at 639 . This is so, we said, because such a verdict “indicates that although the jury found the plaintiff was injured and had incurred special damages, the jury, for whatever reason, failed to compensate [theplaintiff] for any other items of damageId., 492 S.E.2d at 638 . We noted that, “at a minimum, [the] plaintiff experienced pain, suffering, and inconvenience... and was entitled to compensation for [those] elements of damage.” Id.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Booth v. Jones