Richardson v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 321 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 355 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 360E (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act)
Relies on Heckler v. Chaney · Brewer v. Quaker State Oil Refining Corp. · 154 Cal. App. 2d 560 - Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees · Beers v. Bayliner Marine Corp. · Overstreet v. Shoney's, 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To avoid a directed verdict under Tenn. R. Civ. P. 50, the nonmoving party must present some evidence on every element of its case — enough evidence to establish at least a prima facie case. See Harrogate Corp. v. Systems Sales Corp., 915 S.W.2d 812, 818 (Tenn.Ct.App.1995). Normally, a directed verdict is proper only where no material evidence exists on one or more elements that the non-moving party must prove. See generally Conatser v. Clarksville Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 920 S.W.2d 646, 647 (Tenn.1995). Whether the trial court should have directed a verdict presents [the appellate court] with the legal question of whether material evidence was introduced on every element sufficient to create a jury issue.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.