Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 786 F.2d 1296 - Knight v. Texaco, Inc.

Knight v. Texaco, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

786 F.2d 1296 · 1986

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
April 2018
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently April 2018

11 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

901986199020002010decided

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 The Boeing Company v. Daniel C. Shipman · Hildebrand v. Social Security Administration · Dixon v. International Harvester Co. · Caldarera v. Eastern Airlines, Inc. · Shows v. Jamison Bedding, 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In other words, a district court should deny a motion for judgment n.o.v. unless the evidence points so strongly and overwhelmingly in favor of the moving party that reasonable persons could not arrive at a contrary verdict, (citation omitted.) Following the Boeing mandate, it is clear that the district court properly denied Texaco’s motion for judgment n.o.v. ... Because Knight offered substantial evidence that he would suffer future lost earnings, the district court properly denied Texaco’s motion for judgment n.o.v.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “exceeds the maximum amount that the trier of fact could have properly awarded”
    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.