Griffin v. McCoach’s Empirical Analysis
116 F.2d 261 · 1940
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Relies on Aetna Life Insurance v. Dunken · New York Mutual Life Insurance v. Armstrong · Insurance Company v. Bailey · Grigsby v. Russell · Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance v. Schaefer
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under the terms of the policy, a New York contract, no restrictions were placed upon assignments relating to insurable interest. None was created by the laws of New York. Each of the assignments, was executed and delivered in New York by residents of that state to other residents. They were New York contracts and valid under its laws. To apply the laws of Texas to the New York contracts would constitute an unwarranted extra-territorial control of contracts and regulation of business out side of Texas in disregard of the laws of New York; this is not changed by the trial of the suit in a court sitting in Texas.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Griffin v. McCoach
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.