Otis Elevator Company v. McLaney’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Holiday Inns of America, Inc. v. Peck (1974), Ferrell v. Baxter (1971)
44 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 Mitchell Ex Rel. Mitchell v. Knight · Ahlstrom v. Cummings · Watson v. State · Saxton v. Harris · Meyst v. East Fifth Avenue Service, Inc.
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No error ... or defect ... in anything done or omitted by the court ... is ground for granting a new trial or for setting aside a verdict ... unless refusal to take such action appears to the court inconsistent with substantial justice. The court at every stage of the proceeding must disregard any error or defect in the proceeding which does not affect the substantial rights of the parties.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““The matter of granting or refusing a new trial rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge. We shall not interfere with the exercise of his discretion except in the most exceptional circumstances and to prevent a miscarriage of justice. The circumstances which would require our intervention do not exist here. From a review of the record we cannot say that evidence to support the verdict was completely lacking or was so slight and unconvincing as to make the verdict plainly unreasonable and unjust. On the contrary, we find that the issues which the jury were called upon to decide turned upon facts which were in dispute, and that there was clearly an evidentiary basis for the jury’s decision.” (footnotes omitted)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In determining whether error was committed in relation to these motions [for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding verdict],- this court views the evidence in its strongest light in favor of the party against whom the motions were made.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.