New York Central Railroad v. Johnson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the failure of counsel to particularize an exception will not preclude the court, on its own motion, from protecting suitors in their right to verdict uninfluenced by opposing counsel’s appeal to passion and prejudice
• “Such a bitter and passionate attack on petitioner’s conduct of the case, under circumstances tending to stir the resentment and arouse the prejudice of the jury, should have been promptly suppressed.”
• “Such a bitter and passionate attack on petitioner’s conduct of the case, under circumstances tending to stir the resentment and arouse the prejudice of the jury, should have been promptly suppressed.”
• every litigation should be conducted fairly and impartially and the public interest requires that a trial court sua sponte exercise its power and duty to protect litigants in their right to a verdict, uninfluenced by the appeals of counsel to passion or prejudice
• correcting plain error where “paramount considerations are involved”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).