Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 433 A.2d 968 - Bennett v. Bennett

Bennett v. Bennett’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
June 1987
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Barbato v. Epstein · Gordon v. CAMPANELLA CORPORATION · Ruggieri v. Big G Supermarkets, Inc. · Yammerino v. Cranston Tennis Club, Inc. · Galusha v. Carlson

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Once the trial justice has scrutinized the evidence in the fashion described here, he must make one of two choices. In those instances where his judgment tells him that the particular evidence and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom are so nearly balanced that reasonable men could arrive at different results in the consideration of the case, he is obliged to deny the motion and affirm the verdict. However, if his judgment tells him that the jury’s verdict is against the fair preponderance of the evidence and thereby fails either to do justice to the parties or to respond to the merits of the controversy, the motion must be granted and the verdict set aside.” Bennett v. Bennett, 433 A.2d at 970 -71 (quoting Gordon v. Campanella Corp., 112 R.I. at 420-421 , 311 A.2d at 847 ).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““a trial justice cannot make an independent evaluation without substituting his judgment for that of the jury to some extent. The vital question, however, is whether that substitution of judgment is in accordance with the standards laid down in our cases.” Bennett v. Bennett, 433 A.2d 968, 971 (R.I. 1981).”
    1 later decision 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.