Smith v. Shelton’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““... appellate review of a trial judge’s actions in making use of remittitur or additur resolves into a determination of whether or not the jury verdict is within the range of reasonableness established by the credible proof. The upper and lower liniits of that range must be determined by a reasoned examination of the credible proof of damages and all factors that have bearing upon the amount of recovery .... Throughout the review, the jury’s determination should be given primary weight and the trial judge’s secondary weight. “If it is determined that the jury’s verdict is within the range of reasonableness or that both the jury’s and the trial judge’s awards are within that range, the appellate court must restore the jury verdict. If only the trial judge’s award is within the range, it must be affirmed. If neither are within the range of reasonableness, the Court of Appeals should make appropriate use of remittitur and render judgment within the range of reasonableness based upon the credible proof of damages.” 569 S.W.2d at 427 .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Steele v. Ft. Sanders Anesthesia Group, P.C. · State ex rel. Pack v. Castle

2. ““(a) In all jury trials had in civil actions, after the verdict has been rendered, and on motion for a new trial, when the trial judge is of the opinion that the verdict in favor of a party should be reduced, and a remittitur is suggested by him on that account, with the proviso that in case the party in whose favor the verdict has been rendered refuses to make the remittitur a new trial will be awarded, the party in whose favor such verdict has been rendered may make such remittitur under protest, and appeal from the action of the trial judge to the Court of Appeals. (b) If, in the opinion of said Court of Appeals, the verdict of the jury should not have been reduced, but the judgment of the trial court is correct in other respects, the case shall be reversed to that extent, and judgment shall be rendered in the Court of Appeals for the full amount originally awarded by the jury in the trial court.” T.C.A., § 20-10-102.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bates v. Jackson

3. “—(a)(1) In cases where, in the opinion of the trial judge, a jury verdict is not adequate to compensate the plaintiff or plaintiffs in compensatory damages or punitive damages, the trial judge may suggest an additur in such amounts as he deems proper to the compensatory or punitive damages awarded by the jury, or both such classes of damages.... (b)(2) If the Court of Appeals is of the opinion that the verdict of the jury should not have been increased or that the amount of the addi-tur is improper, but that the judgment of the trial court is correct in all other respects, the case shall be reversed to that extent, and the Court of Appeals may order remitted all or any part of the additur.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Foster v. Amcon International, Inc.