Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 138 N.J. Super. 287 - Selected Risks Ins. Co. v. Dierolf

138 N.J. Super. 287 - Selected Risks Ins. Co. v. Dierolf’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
11
states following
January 2007
most recently cited

2 district · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently January 2007 · most notably Reese v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance (1979), Uptegraft v. Home Insurance Co. (1983)

2 district · 33 state decisions — followed in 11 states

1301975198019902000decided

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 In Re the Arbitration Between De Luca & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp. · Schleif v. Hardware Dealer's Mutual Fire Insurance · Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company v. Mason · 136 N.J. Super. 185 - SELECTED RISKS INSURANCE COMPANY v. Schulz · Jennings v. Bridgeford

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

  1. ““One of the functions of the notice provision of an insurance policy is to bring to the insurer’s attention the possible existence of subrogated rights. By virtue of the Cooperation provision of the endorsement *** the initial responsibility to act to protect subrogated rights is upon the insurer. To hold otherwise would penalize a claimant for his insurer’s failure to act under its own cooperation provision.” (Emphasis added.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “.. [EJvery policy of motor vehicle liability insurance... shall contain coverage ... for damages which the insured is entitled to recover from the owner or operator of an uninsured motor vehicle because of bodily injuries sustained in an accident arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of such uninsured motor vehicle....””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““After notice of claim under this endorsement, the company may require the insured to take such action as may be necessary or appropriate to preserve his right to recover damages from any person or organization alleged to be legally responsible for the bodily injury s*®[Emphasis supplied].””
    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.