Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 22 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Stampf v. Long Island Railroad.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Stampf v. Long Island Railroad Anchor | green | “if the jury has reached a seriously erroneous result or its verdict is a miscarriage of justice,” | 7 |
| 2 | Matusick v. Erie County Water Authority | green | “the evidence is such that, without weighing the credibility of the witnesses or otherwise considering the weight of the evidence, there can be but one conclusion as to the verdict that reasonable persons could have reached.” | 5 |
| 3 | Adam Wiercinski v. Mangia 57, Inc. | green | “may only be granted if there exists such a complete absence of evidence supporting the verdict that the jury's findings could only have been the result of sheer surmise and conjecture, or the evidence in favor of the movant is so overwhelming that reasonable and fair minded pers…” | 4 |
| 4 | Adam Wiercinski v. Mangia 57, Inc. | green | “a judgment notwithstanding the verdict may only be granted if there exists such a complete absence of evidence supporting the verdict that the jury's findings could only have been the result of sheer surmise and conjecture, or the evidence in favor of the movant is so overwhelmi…” | 3 |
| 5 | Adam Wiercinski v. Mangia 57, Inc. | green | “such a complete absence of evidence supporting the verdict that the jury's findings could only have been the result of sheer surmise and conjecture, or the evidence in favor of the movant is so overwhelming that reasonable and fair minded persons could not arrive at a verdict ag…” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.