Snodgrass v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis
503 F.2d 94 · 1974
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Relies on United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Duberstein D Stanton · Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · United States v. National Association of Real Estate Boards · Cleo Syrup Corp. v. Coca-Cola Co.
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * [Inadequacy or excessiveness of a verdict is basically, and should be, a matter for the trial court which has had the benefit of hearing the testimony and of observing the demeanor of the witnesses and which knows the community and its standards; that this is a responsibility which, for better working of the judicial process and for other seemingly obvious reasons, is best placed upon its shoulders; * * * we shall continue to consider review, as we have said before, not routinely and in every case, but only in those rare situations where we are pressed to conclude that there is “plain injustice” or a “monstrous” or “shocking” result.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.”
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.