Hamblen v. Kazlauski’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 1 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Prior to the time that the jury returned its verdict the plaintiff did not move for a directed verdict or otherwise question the sufficiency of the evidence to support a verdict if returned in favor of the defendant. Under well established principles, the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict is not preserved for review, Flint v. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co., 2 Cir., 143 F.2d 923; Miller v. Maryland Casualty Co., 2 Cir., 40 F.2d 463, 465, unless this is one of those exceptional cases, Charles v. Norfolk and Western Ry. Co., 7 Cir., 188 F.2d 691 , 695; Commercial Credit Corp. v. Pepper, 5 Cir., 187 F.2d 71 , which render inapplicable the general rule.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Maurie H. Berman v. The Palatine Insurance Company, Limited, the Home Insurance Company, Androchester American Insurance Company

2. “However, the defendant made no motion for a directed verdict at the trial; and, under well-established principles, questions as to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict are not preserved on this appeal. [Citing cases.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Maurie H. Berman v. The Palatine Insurance Company, Limited, the Home Insurance Company, Androchester American Insurance Company