Nix v. Jordan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

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

1. “"Though it might otherwise make good sense to apply the principle of apportionment among joint tortfeasors without exception, the authority for Orr v. Coleman, Ky., 455 S.W.2d 59 (1970) derives from a statute (KRS 454.040) which cannot fairly be construed that liberally. Literally, the statute permits apportionment only against `defendants,' which necessarily means joint defendants. Orval Jordan was a defendant, but only as to the third-party complainants, and not as to the original plaintiff. In Orr v. Coleman, supra , the settling tortfeasor was no longer a defendant in the sense of being a party to the lawsuit, but it was our opinion that the public policy of encouraging settlements justified our construing KRS 454.040 to include as `defendants' joint tortfeasors who probably would have been defendants but for the fact that they had bought their peace. Certainly the settlement itself attests the active assertion of a claim, whereas in this case, by contrast, it is obvious that the plaintiff had not asserted any claim against her husband, the third-party defendant." (Emphasis ours.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Floyd v. Carlisle Const. Co., Inc. · Prudential Life Insurance Co. v. Moody