Martin v. Sussman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 state decisions

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

1. “"* * * `It is error to grant a new trial when the verdict set aside is supported by the testimony appearing in the record and nothing can be accomplished except to have another jury review the cause. See Seaver v. Stratton, 133 Fla. 183 , 183 So. 335 .' Martin v. Stone, Fla. 1951, 51 So.2d 33, 35 ."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Nott v. Baughman · Redwing Carriers, Inc. v. Helwig

2. “"We note from the order of the trial judge granting the new trial that he was of the view that the verdict was contrary to the manifest weight and probative force of the evidence with specific reference to the fact that in his view it affirmatively appeared that the truck driver was guilty of negligence. * * * "Although it is true there were conflicts in the evidence, it appears to us from an examination of the record that the weight and probative force of the evidence did not so clearly and obviously preponderate in favor of the appellee that it would justify a judicial determination that it was manifestly in her favor. We think that the record presented a typical jury question. We recognize that an order of a trial judge granting a motion for a new trial is accorded a strong presumption of correctness because of the broad discretion allowed to him in his review of the case in the light of his direct contact with the trial. However, it is our view of the instant case that although it may be said that the truck driver was guilty of some negligence it cannot be concluded as a matter of law that his negligence, such as it was, necessarily constituted a proximate cause of the collision. "We must, therefore, hold that the order granting the motion for new trial is reversed with directions to enter a judgment on the verdict of the jury." (Emphasis added.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 107 So. 2d 264 - Cloud v. Fallis

3. “"The only thing that would be accomplished by the re-trial of this cause would be a resubmission of the same undisputed facts to another jury for a re-evaluation of the evidence."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 114 So. 2d 33 - Apalachicola Northern Railroad Company v. Tyus