Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 711 S.W.2d 622 - Pope v. Moore

Pope v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

121
cited by 121 later decisions
3
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 119 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 121 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Transportation Insurance Co. v. Moriel (1994), Maritime Overseas Corp. v. Ellis (1998)

1 federal appellate · 119 state decisions

5801986199020002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco))

Relationships

Relies on In Re King's Estate · Flanigan v. Carswell · Dallas Railway & Terminal Co. v. Farnsworth · Wilson v. Freeman, Receiver · Armellini Express Lines of Florida, Inc. v. Ansley

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

  1. “Factual sufficiency is the sole remittitur standard for actual damages_ In determining whether damages are excessive, trial courts and courts of appeals should employ the same test as for any factual insufficiency question. Lower courts should examine all the evidence in the record to determine whether sufficient evidence supports the damage award, remitting only if some portion is so factually insufficient or so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be manifestly unjust. Courts of appeals also should detail the relevant evidence, and if remitting, state clearly why the jury’s finding is so factually insufficient or so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be manifestly unjust. 711 S.W.2d at 624 .”
    3 later decisions 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.