Gumbs v. Pueblo International, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
823 F.2d 768 · 1987
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 18 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Keenan v. City of Philadelphia (1992), Crookston v. Fire Insurance Exchange (1991)
37 federal appellate · 18 district · 5 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
Relies on In re Kauffman Mutual Fund Actions · Gotthelf v. Commissioner · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Grunenthal v. Long Island Rail Road · Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards, Inc. v. Berner
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A jury has very broad discretion in measuring damages; nevertheless, a jury may not abandon analysis for sympathy for a suffering plaintiff and treat an injury as though it were a winning lottery ticket. There must be a rational relationship between the specific injury sustained and the amount awarded.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[O]ur review of this question is severely limited: we may ... reverse and grant a new trial 'only if the verdict is so grossly excessive as to shock the judicial conscience.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“in the best position to evaluate the evidence and assess whether the jury's verdict [was] rationally based”
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.