Griffin v. Matherne’s Empirical Analysis
471 F.2d 911 · 1973
Citation profile
104 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 145 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Burger King Corp. v. Mason (1983), Furr v. AT & T Technologies, Inc. (1987)
104 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 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 Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Ellerman Lines, Ltd. · Jackson E. McVey and H. E. Northway v. Phillips Petroleum Company · Halprin v. Mora · R. B. Co. v. Aetna Insurance
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 145 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“be said to represent a logical and probable decision on the relevant issues as submitted.”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Seventh Amendment requires that if there is a view of the case which makes the jury's answers consistent, the court must adopt that view and enter judgment accordingly.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“6. Rule 49(a) unlike 49(b) does not provide for resubmission. Under Rule 49(b) the jury returns answers to special interrogatories and a general verdict. To enable it to perform this dual function, the former primarily a factual undertaking and the latter an application of the law to the facts, the jury must be fully charged, and the rule itself provides for reconsideration by the jury or for new trial if there is inconsistency between one or more special answers and the general verdict. Rule 49(a), under which the jury's function is solely fact-finding with only such instruction as necessary for it to discharge that function, does not provide for jury reconsideration of inconsistent answers.”
3 later decisions 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.