Delaware Ins. v. Greer’s Empirical Analysis
120 F. 916 · 1903
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently June 2003
13 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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 Imperial Fire Insurance v. Coos County · Titus v. . Glens Falls Insurance Company · Springfield Steam Laundry Co. v. Traders' Insurance · Grosvenor v. . the Atlantic Fire Insurance Co. of Brooklyn · Bates v. Equitable Insurance
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But the clause which these parties selected -and attached to the policy had a known, definite, and adjudicated meaning. It had a settled legal effect when they chose and appended it to the contract. The meaning and effect that the indemnity thereby secured to the mortgagees was subject to the risk of every act and neglect of the mortgagor which would avoid the original policy-in his hands. No form of words could have been devised' or adopted, relating to the insurance of these mortgagees, which would so clearly and conclusively have expressed the intention of the parties to this contract to subject the indemnity secured by the mortgagees to the risk of the acts and omissions of the mortgagor as the clause which they selected and attached to the policy, because a long line of adjudications, covering more than 40 years, had established the fact that this was its true meaning and effect.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The obvious meaning of their plain terms is not to be discarded for some curious hidden sense which nothing but the exigency of a hard ease and the ingenuity of an acute mind would discover. Contracts of insurance, like other contracts, are to be construed according to the sense and meaning of the terms which the parties have used, and, if they are clear and unambiguous, their terms are to be taken in their plain, ordinary, and popular sense.” Kiesel & Co. v. Sun. Ins., 88 Fed. 243 , 246, 31 C. C. A. 515 ; McGlother v. Providence M. Ac. Co., 89 Fed. 685 , 689, 32 C. C. A. 318 ; Brown v. United States Casualty Co. (C. C.) 95 Fed. 935 , 956.”
1 later decision 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.