Smith v. Litten’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently November 2013
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 Evaluation Research Corp. v. Alequin · Giant of Virginia, Inc. v. Pigg · Jordan v. Sauve · Pugsley v. Privette · Ravenwood Towers, Inc. v. Woodyard
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]f a tortfeasor's tort was intentional rather than negligent, i.e., deliberately committed with intent to harm the victim ... and if the evidence is sufficient to support an award of compensatory damages, the victim's right to punitive damages and the quantum thereof are jury questions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wyatt v. McDermott
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.