Tackett v. Kidder’s Empirical Analysis
616 F.2d 1050 · 1980
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently February 2008 · most notably Greenwood v. Dittmer (1985), Sanders v. St. Louis County (1983)
18 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 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 Mays v. Pioneer Lumber Corp. · United States v. Strebler · Shaw v. Edward Hines Lumber Co. · Satterfield v. Rebsamen Ford, Inc.
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If a verdict is directed and the appellate court holds that the evidence was in fact sufficient to go to the jury, an entire new trial must be had. If, on the other hand, the trial court submits the case to the jury, though it thinks the evidence insufficient, final determination of the case is greatly expedited. If the jury agrees with the Court’s appraisal of the evidence, and returns a verdict for the party who moved for a directed verdict, the case is at an end. If the jury brings in a different verdict the trial court can grant judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Then if the appellate court holds that the trial court was in error in its appraisal of the evidence, it can reverse and order judgment on the verdict of the jury, without any need for a new trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Henkel v. Holm“* * * a motion for a directed verdict or a judgment notwithstanding the verdict should be granted if there is no substantial, i. e., not more than a mere scintilla of evidence to sustain the verdict.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The scintilla evidence rule is not applied in federal courts.”
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.