Davis v. Graviss’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Friends for all Children, Inc. v. Lockheed Aircraft Corp. (1984), Shuamber v. Henderson (1991)
3 federal appellate · 50 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 Deutsch v. Shein · 209 Pa. Super. 280 - Schwegel v. Goldberg · Martin v. City of New Orleans · Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Mattingly · Stone v. Graham
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he appellate court no longer steps into the shoes of the trial court to inspect the actions of the jury from his perspective. Now, the appellate court reviews only the actions of the trial judge ... to determine if his actions constituted an error of law. There is no error of law unless the trial judge is said to have abused his discretion and thereby rendered his decision clearly erroneous.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““It is apparent from a reading of Davis that the [Supreme] Court recognized only the right to compensation for an increased likelihood of future complications arising from a realized injury other than a mere contact. The [Supreme] Court made this clear when it framed the issue as involving the plaintiff’s ‘right to compensation for an injury causing an increased, risk of future harm.’ Id. at 930.... In this jurisdiction a present physical injury is a prerequisite to recovery for an increased risk of future harm.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he trial court and appellate court have different functions ... the trial court is charged with the responsibility of deciding whether the jury’s award appeal's “to have been given under the influence of passion or prejudice or in disregard of the evidence or the instructions of the court.” CR 59.01(d). This is a discretionary function assigned to the trial judge who has heard the witnesses first-hand and viewed their demeanor and who has observed the jury throughout the trial.”
2 later decisions 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.