Howe v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently December 2001 · most notably Bankers & Shippers Insurance v. Electro Enterprises Inc. (1980), Ellis v. Minneapolis Commission on Civil Rights (1982)
44 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 Lyle Cashion Company v. McKendrick · Lustik v. Rankila · Smith v. Smith · Melady-Briggs Cattle Corp. v. Drovers State Bank · Wolfson v. Northern States Management Co.
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Thus, the prevailing party in a declaratory judgment action to construe an insurance policy or a will should be able to rely on that judgment to estop the defeated party from again attempting to have the same instrument construed in a subsequent declaratory judgment action. So, too, should the prevailing party be estopped from attempting to relitigate in order to win more rights under the instrument. "The problem is only slightly more complex where, as here, the plaintiff in a declaratory judgment action would normally be the defendant in a coercive suit for money damages. Such a plaintiff should be estopped from bringing successive declaratory judgment actions in which he raises issues that might have been disposed of in the first suit. So, too, should he be estopped by a declaratory judgment adverse to him from raising defenses in a subsequent coercive action against him that were adjudicated or might have been raised in the prior suit.. .. "We are convinced, therefore, that the Federal court fully construed all three insurance policies involved in the present litigation. The obvious advantages of an early adjudication of insurance coverage in a personal injury context should not be undercut by a retrial of legal relationships already adjudicated.. . . "United Services clearly went to Federal court in order to fully litigate the issues of insurance coverage. It had its chance to present all its defenses in the forum of its choice and should not now be permitted, as defenda”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“We are convinced, therefore, that the Federal court fully construed all three insurance policies involved in the present litigation. The obvious advantages of an early adjudication of insurance coverage in a personal injury context should not be undercut by a retrial of legal relationships already adjudicated.. . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Where a subsequent suit for money damages is brought by the prevailing party in a declaratory judgment action, the cause of action for damages should not be considered merged into a judgment that merely declares abstract rights.”
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.