Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 185 Kan. 665 - Jenkins v. United States Fire Insurance

Jenkins v. United States Fire Insurance’s Empirical Analysis

1959

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
13
states following
August 2017
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably Government Employees Insurance v. DeJames (1970), United Nuclear Corp. v. Allendale Mutual Insurance (1985)

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 43 state decisions — followed in 13 states

2201959196019701980199020002010decided

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 Braly v. Commercial Casualty Insurance · Skelly v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. · Central Mutual Insurance Co. v. Royal · Nicholas v. Latham · Louisville Underwriters v. Durland

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

  1. “"When construed on the basis of intention, as required by the foregoing decision, and others therein cited, we believe the clause `collapse of building or any part thereof as used in the involved insurance contract is to be interpreted as comprehending that, if brought about by unusual and extraordinary circumstances which the parties to that agreement could not normally expect or foresee on the date of its execution, the settling", falling, cracking, bulging or breaking of the insured building or any part thereof in such manner as to materially impair the basic structure or substantial integrity of the building is to be regarded as a `collapse' of the building within the meaning of that word as used in such clause of the policy." [ 185 Kan. 665 , 347 P.2d 423 ].”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “If the condition of the part of the building claimed to be in a state of collapse is such that the basic structure or substantial integrity of the part is materially impaired so that it cannot perform its structural function as a part of the building and is in immediate danger of disintegration, then it can be said to be in a state of collapse within the meaning of the extended coverage of the policy.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Collapse of building(s) or any part thereof.”
    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.