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.
6 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 20 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 Kemp v. Philadelphia Transportation Co..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kemp v. Philadelphia Transportation Co. Anchor | green | “is unique and dependent on its own special circumstances.” | 4 |
| 2 | Neal v. Bavarian Motors, Inc. | green | “the highest amount any jury could properly award.” | 4 |
| 3 | Dubose, R. v. Quinlan, M. | green | “rather, it is our task to determine whether the lower court committed a 'clear' or 'gross' abuse of discretion when conducting its initial evaluation of a defendant's request for remittitur.” | 4 |
| 4 | Neal v. Bavarian Motors, Inc. | green | “must necessarily be as high-and may well be higher-than the level the court would have deemed appropriate if working on a clean slate.” | 3 |
| 5 | Potochnick v. Perry | green | “so shocks the conscience as to suggest that the jury was influenced by partiality, prejudice, mistake, or corruption.” | 3 |
| 6 | Kemp v. Philadelphia Transportation Co. | green | “because each case is unique and dependent on its own special circumstances.” | 2 |
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.