Ferrara Inc v. St Paul Mercury Insurance Co’s Empirical Analysis
169 F.3d 43 · 1999
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently September 2010
4 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 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 Reiter v. Sonotone Corp. · Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey · Hodgens v. General Dynamics Corp. · Hazen Paper Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. · United States v. Alpers
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“provision redundant, an interpretation running counter to the customary assumption that all words within a clause serve some purpose.... 7 Here, the malicious acts in question are arson -- and not, as a practical matter, arson by the owner or its agents, which are actions separately excluded from coverage by law, but the rarer acts of fire-setting by vandals or other malicious individuals. Such acts fall within the general category of intentional third-party violence which can be said to be a principal overall theme of the SR&CC clause. The”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“). St. Paul denied coverage after its investigation ended with a determination of arson, which it understood to be excluded from coverage under the policy. Thereafter, F&D brought an action in the district court claiming that St. Paul's refusal to pay was a breach of the insurance contract and constituted”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“category serves the relevant purpose of excluding destructive acts not public or tumultuous enough to be considered a riot or civil commotion. In sum, the SR&CC clause unambiguously excludes from coverage losses caused by”
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.