Honeywell v. Roberson’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Wormack v. Howard · Mundey v. Unsatisfied Claim & Judgment Fund Board · 222 F. Supp. 292 - Ohio Casualty Insurance Company v. Ross · 85 N.J. Super. 143 - Gilbert v. Unsatisfied Claim, Etc., Bd. · Austin v. Unsatisfied Claim & Judgment Fund Board
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(c) That the applicant has fully pursued and exhausted all remedies available to him for recovering the amounts referred to in paragraph-(3) of subsection (b) of § 162 by commencing action against all such persons against whom the-applicant might reasonably be considered as having a cause of action in respect of such damages and prosecuting every such action in good faith-to judgment and taking all reasonable steps available to him to collect on every judgment so obtained.” Code (1967 Repl. Vol.), Art. 66%, §160 (c).”
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.