4 Smith & H. 173 - Reeves v. Catignani’s Empirical Analysis
1928
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently November 2006 · most notably 32 Tenn. App. 425 - International Harvester Co. v. Sartain (1948), Overstreet v. Shoney's, Inc. (1999)
3 federal appellate · 34 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.
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`The amount of damages is primarily for the jury to determine, and next to the jury the most competent person to pass on the matter is the judge who presided at the trial and heard the evidence, and after he has approved the verdict it is not for us to substitute our judgment for his or the jury's, but it is our duty not to disturb the verdict unless it is plainly so unreasonable as to shock the judicial conscience. [Citing cases.]'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hoskins v. Blalock
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.