Glenn v. Fleming’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 52 district · 122 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 221 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably Transportation Insurance Co. v. Moriel (1994), State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Gandy (1996)
24 federal appellate · 52 district · 122 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 Gray v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance · Griggs v. Bertram · Miller v. Shugart · Damron v. Sledge · DiMarzo v. American Mutual Insurance
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 221 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the question of liability depends upon the circumstances of the particular case and must be determined by taking into account the various factors present, rather than on the basis of any general statement or definition.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A majority of courts permit the use of covenants not to execute. One line of reasoning concludes that a covenant is not a release of liability. Other courts reason that the insured is entitled to use reasonable means to avoid personal liability. The primary argument against permitting the use of covenants not to execute rests upon the concern that their use will impart a collusive character to a personal injury suit ... It would be highly unusual for fraud or collusion to taint the amount of the judgment when, as in the [case at bar], the assignment/covenant is executed after a jury verdict. In the situation where the case is litigated at trial before the entry of judgment, the amount may be assumed to be realistic. We do express concern over the reasonableness of assignment/covenants in which the amount of the judgment assigned has been determined by agreement of the parties. In this type of consent judgment case the settlement between the plaintiff and the insured may not represent an arm's length determination of the value of the plaintiff's claim.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“have adopted, in our development of the substantive case law, the principle that the insurer's duties are contractually based and then approved a tort standard of care for determining when the contract duty has been breached”
2 later decisions 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.