Bady v. Murphy-Kjos’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 federal appellate ·

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

1. “In reviewing jury instructions, we examine “whether the instructions, taken as a whole and viewed in the light of the evidence and applicable law, fairly and adequately submitted the issues in the case to the jury.” Wheeling Pittsburgh Steel Corp. v. Beelman River Terminals, Inc., 254 F.3d 706 , 711 (8th Cir.2001) (quoting White v. Honeywell, Inc., 141 F.3d 1270 , 1278 (8th Cir.1998) (internal quotation marks omitted)). We afford the district court “broad discretion in instructing the jury.” Ernster v. Luxco, Inc., 596 F.3d 1000 , 1004-05 (8th Cir.2010).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Farrington v. Smith

2. “A district court enjoys wide discretion in ruling on the admissibility of proffered evidence, and evidentiary rulings should only be overturned if there was a clear and prejudicial abuse of discretion.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Smith v. Seeco, Inc.

3. “A common type of statement that falls outside the hearsay definition, because it is not offered for its truth, is a statement that is offered to show its effect on the recipient.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. United States v. Univar USA Inc.