Rogillio v. Cazedessus’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 79 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently March 2006 · most notably American Home Assurance Company v. Czarniecki (1969), Quindlen v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America (1973)
6 federal appellate · 79 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 Parks v. Hall · Dominguez v. American Casualty Co. · Brooks v. Delta Fire & Casualty Company · Donovan v. Standard Oil Co. of Louisiana · Kneeland v. Bernardi
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Concisely stated, this doctrine is that initial permission, express or implied, is sufficient to constitute the operator of a vehicle an insured under the omnibus clause. It is predicated upon a rationale that the owner of a vehicle should reasonably anticipate and foresee deviations and that by placing the vehicle in the control of the permittee he impliedly consents to its extended use. Parks v. Hall, supra; Dominguez v. American Casualty Co., 217 La. 487 , 46 So.2d 744 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"The words used in the clause would be practically meaningless and the object there made nugatory if it were necessary to determine in every case whether, at the time and under the circumstances of the accident, the driver was proceeding within the limitations of the permission of the assured to use the car. * * *"”
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.