Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 122 N.M. 221 - Kaiser v. DeCarrera

Kaiser v. DeCarrera’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
1
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

10 district · 25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably Jordan v. Allstate Insurance (2010), Marckstadt v. Lockheed Martin Corp. (2009)

10 district · 25 state decisions

160199620002010decided

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 Romero v. Dairyland Insurance · Sandoval v. Valdez · Fasulo v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance · Myers Ex Rel. White v. Kapnison · State ex rel. Lake County Department of Public Welfare v. Lake Superior Court

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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “An insured may reject uninsured motorist coverage, but the rejection must satisfy the regulations promulgated by the superintendent of insurance. The rejection must be made a part of the policy by endorsement on the declarations sheet, by attachment of the written rejection to the policy, or by some other means that makes the rejection a part of the policy so as to clearly and unambiguously call to the attention of the insured the fact that such coverage has been waived.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “as required in writing by the provisions of Section 66-5-301 NMSA 1978”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Even though an insured may sign a rejection notice of UM/ UIM coverage, that alone is not enough. The rejection notice must also be endorsed, attached, stamped or otherwise made a part of the policy to be effective.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.