Weber v. Walters’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 federal appellate · 12 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “`The rule of law is well established that if the evidence is conflicting, or if the inferences to be drawn from the credible evidence are doubtful and uncertain, and there is any credible evidence which under any reasonable view will support or admit of an inference either for or against the claim or contention of any party, then the rule that the proper inference to be drawn therefrom is for the jury should be firmly adhered to and the court should not assume to answer such question either upon a motion for nonsuit or direction of verdict, or by substituting another answer after the verdict is returned. Wisconsin Telephone Co. v. Russell (1943), 242 Wis. 247, 252 , 7 N. W. (2d) 825 , and cases there cited.' Czerniakowski v. National Ice & Coal Co. 252 Wis. 112, 115 , 31 N. W. (2d) 156 .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 58 Wis. 2d 328 - Wills v. Regan · 56 Wis. 2d 44 - Wuorinen v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

2. “`What is proximate cause is ordinarily a question for the jury if the evidence is conflicting or if different inferences can be drawn from it. Schultz v. Brogan, 251 Wis. 390 , 29 N. W. (2d) 719 , and "if the evidence is conflicting or, although not contradictory, is open to two or more reasonable inferences as to what actually took place, the case must be left to the jury.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 65 Wis. 2d 770 - Nelson v. L. & J. PRESS CORP.