Exxon Corporation v. St Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company’s Empirical Analysis
129 F.3d 781 · 1997
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently February 2020 · most notably American Home Assurance Company v. United Space Alliance Llc (2004), J&B Entertainment, Inc. v. City of Jackson (1998)
8 federal appellate · 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 Wilton v. Seven Falls Co. · 634 So. 2d 1180 - Reynolds v. Select Properties, Ltd. · E. C. Ernst, Inc. v. Manhattan Construction Company of Texas, Providence Hospital, Fairbanks-Morse, Inc., Charles H. McCauley Associates, Inc. · Melton v. Teachers Insurance & Annuity Ass'n of America · 284 So. 2d 905 - Lombard v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The fact that St. Paul did not object to the district court's [sua sponte summary judgment] or request a new trial or rehearing ... indicates that St. Paul had no further evidence to present or argument to make regarding any material dispute of fact.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Justin Love“when 'one party moves for summary judgment the district court, in an appropriate case, may grant summary judgment against the movant, even though the opposite party has not actually filed a motion for summary judgment.'”
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.