Matsyuk v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
15 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Boeing Co. v. Van Gemert · Central Railroad Banking Co of Georgia v. Pettus · 117 Wash. 2d 37 - Olympic Steamship Co., Inc. v. Centennial Ins. Co. · Summit Valley Industries, Inc. v. Local 112, United Brotherhood of Carpenters · 177 W. Va. 323 - Hayseeds, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Cas.
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to share pro rata in. the attorney fees incurred by an injured person when the recovery benefits the PIP insurer.” Matsyuk v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 173 Wash.2d 643, 647 , 272 P.3d 802 (2012). . Plaintiff argues briefly that State Farm”
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.