31 Tenn. App. 103 - Waller v. Skeleton’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 46 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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Plaintiff, however, insists that, since all of defendants’ assignments of error relate to matters which must be made to appear by bill of exceptions, we cannot review such assignments, because the bill of exceptions saved by defendants was a mere skeleton form and invalid. Battier v. State, 114 Tenn. 563 , 86 S. W. 711 ; Rose v. Third Nat. Bank, 27 Tenn. App. 553, 563 , 183 S. W. (2d) 1, 5 . “Defendants’ appeal in error does not depend on that bill of exceptions. The one saved by plaintiff is available to both parties. Williams v. Bowdon, 31 Tenn. 282 ; Hughes v. Young, 17 Tenn. App. 24, 27, 28 , 65 S. W. (2d) 858, 860 . These were cases of writs of error, hut the principle is equally applicable to appeals in error. The bill of exceptions, regardless of which party takes it, must contain all the evidence of both parties and be a complete record of the trial. That record does not belong to either party, but is equally available to both, whether on appeal in error or on writ of error.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Davidson v. Burger

2. ““. . . It also appears that defendants’ motion for a new trial was filed November 6, 1946, within 30 days from the entry of the judgment on October 30, and within the trial term. So this motion was seasonably filed. “Being seasonably filed, this motion suspended the judgment and continued the trial judge’s jurisdiction until he could dispose of the motion. He could do this at a special term (Code secs. 9935, 9936), at an adjourned term (secs. 9937, 9945.5, Ch. 7, Acts 1943), or at a subsequent regular term (sec. 159), and could then grant an appeal in error and allow time for perfecting it and for settling a bill of exceptions, for these purposes the judgment being regarded as entered at the time of overruling of the motion for a new trial.” (Citing Authorities)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Chambers v. Holland

3. ““A defendant’s negligent act, in order to be the proximate or legal cause of plaintiff’s injuries, need not have been the whole cause or the only factor in bringing them about. It was enough if such act was a substantial factor in causing them.” Waller v. Skeleton, supra, 212 S.W.2d at 696 , citing Restatement of Torts §§ 431, 433, 435; 1 Street, Foundations of Legal Liability, 109-123; Jackson v. B. Lowenstein & Bros. Inc., 175 Tenn. 535 , 136 S.W.2d 495 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Velsicol Chemical Corp. v. Chattanooga Coke & Chemicals Co.