Richardson v. Joines’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 2015
5 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 497 So. 2d 471 - Jawad v. Granade · 539 So. 2d 160 - Alpine Bay Resorts, Inc. v. Wyatt · 510 So. 2d 214 - Ashbee v. Brock
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Standard of Review “The standard of review to be applied by this Court in reviewing the granting of a motion for a new trial is set out in Jawad v. Granade, 497 So.2d 471, at 477 (Ala.1986): “‘[A]n order granting a motion for new trial on the sole ground that the verdict is against the great weight or preponderance of the evidence will be reversed for abuse of discretion where on review it is easily perceivable from the record that the jury verdict is supported by the evidence.’ “Alpine Bay Resorts, Inc. v. Wyatt, 539 So.2d 160 (Ala.1988), sets out the procedure for the application of the Jawad standard: “ ‘[W]hen the evidence meets the “sufficiency” test, jury verdicts .are presumed correct, and this presumption is strengthened by- the trial court’s denial of a motion for new trial. Therefore, a judgment based upon a jury verdict and sustained by the denial of a post-judgment motion for a new trial, will not be reversed on a weight-of-the-evidence ground unless it is “plainly and palpably’ wrong. Ashbee v. Brock, 510 So.2d 214 (Ala.1987). See, also, Jawad v. Granade, 497 So.2d 471 -(Ala.1986).’ “539 So.2d at 162-63. “While the ‘new trial’ test is a subjective one .... and is measured by a discretionary standard, the range of the trial court’s discretion, as announced in Jawad , has been considerably narrowed. Thus, the trial court is left with 1 no discretion to grant a new trial on a ‘weight of the evidence’ ground', except when the verdict and the judgment entered thereon ”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The standard of review to be applied by this Court in reviewing the granting of a motion for a new trial is set out in Jawad v. Granade, 497 So.2d 471, at 477 (Ala.1986): “ ‘[A]n order granting a motion for new trial on the sole ground that the verdict is against the great weight or preponderance of the evidence will be reversed for abuse of discretion where on review it is easily perceivable from the record that the jury verdict is supported by the evidence.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the trial court is left with no discretion to grant a new trial on a `weight of the evidence' ground, except when the verdict and the judgment entered thereon are so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be `plainly and palpably' wrong, i.e., `manifestly unjust.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.