Ross v. Meyers’s Empirical Analysis
883 F.2d 486 · 1989
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently January 2018
3 federal appellate ·
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 Young v. United States Ex Rel. Vuitton Et Fils S. A. · Eash v. Riggins Trucking Inc. · 50 Ohio St. 2d 69 - Feliciano v. Kreiger · Perfect Fit Industries, Inc. v. Acme Quilting Co. · Shuffler v. Heritage Bank
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The inquiry as to the existence of probable cause is fact-specific and great deference is required to be assigned to the jury’s findings of fact as to the issue. See Yancey v. Carroll County, Kentucky, 876 F.2d 1238 (6th Cir.1989) (probable cause determination is to be made by jury unless there is only one reasonable outcome). As with other jury verdiets, the evidence must be construed most strongly in favor of the verdict and all credibility decisions must be resolved in favor of the verdict. E.g., Ratliff v. Wellington Exempted Village Schools Bd. ofEduc., 820 F.2d 792 (6th Cir.1987).”
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.