Anchor v. M O'Toole L’s Empirical Analysis
94 F.3d 1014 · 1996
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2022 · most notably United States v. Francis (1999), Morales v. American Honda Motor Co. (1998)
28 federal appellate · 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 National Union Fire Insurance v. Helfand · Huebner v. United States · Gafford v. General Electric Co. · 98 Ohio App. 3d 597 - Doner v. Snapp · Charles R. Combs Trucking, Inc. v. International Harvester 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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In diversity cases, we apply federal law in reviewing a denial of a motion for a new trial, '[a]nd, in reviewing a trial court's denial of a new trial motion on the ground that the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence, we accept the jury's verdict if it was reasonably reached.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A trial court may not grant a new trial on the ground of insufficient damages UNLESS THE JURY VERDICT IS ONE THAT COULD NOT REASONABLY HAVE BEEN REACHED. The remedy of a new trial for inadequate damages is appropriate only where the evidence indicates that the jury awarded damages in an amount substantially less than unquestionably proved by the plaintiff’s uncontradict-ed and undisputed evidence. THUS, IF THE VERDICT IS SUPPORTED BY SOME COMPETENT, CREDIBLE EVIDENCE, A TRIAL COURT WILL BE DEEMED NOT TO HAVE ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN DENYING THE MOTION.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Martin v. Heideman · Heard v. Finco“`definite and firm conviction that the trial court committed a clear error of judgment.'”
2 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.