Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 265 Kan. 810 - Brumley v. Lee

Brumley v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

115
cited by 115 later decisions
12
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 34 district · 72 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 115 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably 26 Cal. 4th 758 - Safeco Insurance of America v. Robert S. (2001), Lee Builders, Inc. v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance (2006)

4 federal appellate · 34 district · 72 state decisions — followed in 12 states

7801998200020102020decided

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 Upland Mutual Insurance, Inc. v. Noel · Marquis v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. · Catholic Diocese of Dodge City v. Raymer · First Financial Insurance v. Bugg · 135 Wis. 2d 245 - Northwestern National Insurance v. Nemetz

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

  1. “Because an insurance contract is an agreement between parties that should be interpreted in a manner consistent with the expressions therein, the policy before us unambiguously expresses an intention to deny coverage to all insureds when damage is the result of a business pursuit. The purpose of the severability clause is not to negate the plainly worded meaning of the business exclusion clause.[ 22 ]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “Such a holding is not justifiable. A severability clause provides that each insured will be treated independently under the policy. The fact remains, however, that as applied even independently to each insured, an”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “held... that a severability clause renders an 'any insured' exclusion meaningless ... on the basis that, otherwise, the severability clause would itself be meaningless”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.