Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 144 F.3d 35 - CPC International, Inc. v. Northbrook Excess & Surplus Insurance

CPC International, Inc. v. Northbrook Excess & Surplus Insurance’s Empirical Analysis

144 F.3d 35 · 1998

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
3
states following
February 2020
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently February 2020

2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

501998200020102020decided

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 Wagenmann v. Adams · New Castle County v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. · Highlands Insurance v. Aerovox Inc. · Nashua Corp. v. First State Insurance · Rodriguez-Hernandez v. Miranda-Velez

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

  1. “CPC Intern., Inc. v. Northbrook Excess & Surplus Ins. Co., supra, 668 A. 2d at 649 . See also CPC Intern. v. Northbrook Excess & Surplus Ins. Co., 673 A. 2d 71 (R.I.1996) and 144 F. 3d 35 (1st Cir.1998). This holding was subsequently reaffirmed by the Rhode Island Supreme Court in a case where it also specifically declined the appellant's invitation to construe CPC”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, drawing all possible inferences in its favor. . . . We do not consider the credibility of witnesses, resolve conflicts in testimony, or evaluate the weight of the evidence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “that an `occurrence' under a general liability policy takes place when property damage, which includes property loss, manifests itself or is discovered or in the exercise of reasonable diligence, is discoverable.”
    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.