Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 282 U.S. 545 - Concordia Ins. Co. of Milwaukee v. School Dist. No. 98 of Payne Cty.

Concordia Ins. Co. of Milwaukee v. School Dist. No. 98 of Payne Cty.’s Empirical Analysis

282 U.S. 545 · 1931

Citation profile

223
cited by 223 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
9
states following
August 1997
most recently cited

140 federal appellate · 28 district · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 223 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1997 · most notably Vandenbark v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co. (1941), Elias Siegelman, Individually, and as Administrator of the Estate of Eva Siegelman, Deceased v. Cunard White Star Limited (1955)

140 federal appellate · 28 district · 28 state decisions

11101931194019501960197019801990decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedConcordia Ins. v. School Dist. No. 98 of Payne County (from Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Burgess v. Seligman · Miller v. Robertson · Standard Oil Co of New Jersey v. United States · Lumber Underwriters v. Rife

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

  1. “The requirement of a fire insurance policy that verified proofs of loss be furnished within sixty days after the loss has occurred is waived, and the insurer estopped against setting it up, where the insurer, through adjusters, investigated the loss and proposed a settlement which was not accepted because of a difference in opinion as to the value of the building destroyed, and no objection was made at that time that proofs of loss had not been furnished, or request made that they be furnished. "A provision of a fire insurance policy that no officer, agent, or other representative shall have power to waive any provision or condition of the policy except such as by the terms of the policy may be the subject of agreement indorsed thereon or added thereto, and that no waiver shall be effective unless written upon or attached to the policy, has reference to those provisions and conditions which constitute part of the contract of insurance, and does not apply to a waiver, after the loss occurs, of stipulations in respect of things to be done subsequent to the loss as prerequisites to adjustment and payment, such as the furnishing of verified proofs of loss within a stated time.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ * * * even in a case of unliquidated damages, ‘when necessary in order to arrive at fair compensation, the court in the exercise of a sound discretion may include interest or its equivalent as an element of damages.’ ” 10”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““§ 3287. Every person who is entitled to recover damages certain, or capable of being made certain by calculation, and the right to recover which is vested in him upon a particular day, is entitled also to recover interest thereon from that day, except during such time as the debtor is prevented by law, or by the act of the creditor, from paying the debt.” “§ 3302. The detriment caused by the breach of an obligation to pay money only, is deemed to be the amount due by the terms of the obligation, with interest thereon.””
    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.