Rush v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

59 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'only if the error prejudices the substantial rights of a party and would result in a miscarriage of justice if left uncorrected.' " Id. (quoting Rush v. Smith, 56 F.3d 918 , 922 (8th Cir.) (en banc ), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 959, 116 S.Ct. 409, 133 L.Ed.2d 328 (1995)); Dupre, 112 F.3d at 334 (also citing Rush ); Ryther, 108 F.3d at 847 ("plain error”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Westcott v. Crinklaw · Cross v. Cleaver

2. “For this reason, courts have long recognized that judges must be especially careful when making comments before a jury. “A trial judge must be especially cautious and circumspect in language and conduct during a jury trial. The judge must be fair to all parties and not do or say anything that might prejudice either litigant in the eyes of the jury.” Coast-to-Coast Stores v. Womack-Bowers, 818 F.2d 1398 , 1401 (8th Cir.1987). This admonition reflects the vital role that the trial judge plays in a jury trial. More than a century ago, the Supreme Court explained the need for an exacting standard of judicial conduct: “It is obvious that under any system of jury trials the influence of the trial judge on the jury is necessarily and properly of great weight, and that his [or her] lightest word or intimation is received with deference, and may prove controlling.” Starr v. United States, 153 U.S. 614, 626 , 14 S.Ct. 919, 923 , 38 L.Ed. 841 (1894). More recently, the Fifth Circuit reiterated this need for exemplary comportment: “By reason of his [or her] role, quickly observed by jurors, the judge is a figure of over-powering influence, whose every change in facial expression is noted, and whose every word is received attentively and acted upon with alacrity and without question.” Travelers Ins. Co. v. Ryan, 416 F.2d 362, 364 (5th Cir.1969).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Schultz v. Amick · United States v. Padilla-Galarza

3. “critical importance of the jury's assessment of witness credibility”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ryan v. Board Of Police Commissioners · Ryan