Bryson v. Bramlett’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently August 1995 · most notably 431 So. 2d 454 - Tideway Oil Programs, Inc. v. Serio (1983), Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Stevenson (1963)
12 federal appellate · 27 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
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956)
Relies on Berhns v. Harris · 22 Tenn. App. 670 - Lichter v. Fulcher · Sartain v. Dixie Coal & Iron Co. · Fiedler v. Potter · 13 Tenn. App. 115 - Nashville Union Stockyards, Inc. v. Grissim
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where fraud, malice, gross negligence or oppression intervenes, the law blends the interest of society and of the aggrieved individual, and gives damages such as will operate as an example or warning to the party or others to deter them from similar transactions.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where the case is tried before the Chancellor it is obvious that it is peculiarly within the discretion of the Chancellor as to how much, if any, punitive damages should be allowed. It is a matter of discretion which will not be interfered with by this court. We know of no fixed rule which could guide this or any other court in fixing the amount of exemplary damages to be awarded. And we know of no reason why we should substitute our judgment for the judgment of the Chancellor in this respect. The fact that we have the latter say in the matter offers no reason for altering the decree entered, and we are not inclined to do so. (Citations omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cross v. McCurry
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.