Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 793 F.2d 792 - John B. Young v. Carl E. Langley Wilbur E. Bond, Jointly and Severally

John B. Young v. Carl E. Langley Wilbur E. Bond, Jointly and Severally’s Empirical Analysis

793 F.2d 792 · 1986

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
1
states following
September 2017
most recently cited

50 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Gutzwiller v. Fenik (1988), Noble Payne v. Chrysler Motors Corporation Jeep Division (1994)

50 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

3601986199020002010decided

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

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Moran v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. · Warner Et Al. v. Kewanee MacHinery & Conveyor Co. · Wiskotoni v. Michigan National Bank-West · Dunn v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

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

  1. “where a defendant moves for [a] directed verdict at the close of plaintiff's testimony and does not renew its motion at the close of the entire testimony, defendant waives its original motion and is precluded from questioning the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “inadequacy or excessiveness of a verdict is basically, and should be, a matter for the trial court which has had the benefit of hearing the testimony and of observing the demeanor of the witnesses and which knows the community and its standards”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “This court may not review the alleged excessiveness of verdicts absent a timely motion for new trial and the trial court's ruling thereon.”); Calcagni v. Hudson Waterways Corp., 603 F.2d 1049, 1051 (2d Cir.1979) (”
    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.