Williams v. Union Central Life Insurance’s Empirical Analysis
291 U.S. 170 · 1934
Citation profile
122 federal appellate · 125 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 283 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1998 · most notably Louisiana Ins. Guar. Ass'n v. Interstate Fire & Casualty Co. (1994), Hemel v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (1947)
122 federal appellate · 125 state decisions — followed in 25 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Board of Assessors of the Parish of Orleans v. New York Life Insurance Company · Matter of Interocean Mercantile Corporation · First Texas State Insurance v. Smalley · United States Life Ins. v. Spinks
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 283 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As there is no ambiguity in the provisions under consideration, there is no occasion for resort to the familiar principle that equivocal words should be construed against the insurer. While it is highly important that ambiguous clauses should not be permitted to serve as traps for policyholders, it is equally important, to the insured as well as to the insurer, that the provisions of insurance policies which are clearly and definitely set forth in appropriate language and upon which the calculations of the company are based, should be maintained unimpaired by loose and ill-considered interpretations.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““. . . the policy provided for guaranteed ‘premium reduction coupons’ which were fixed liabilities requiring a reserve, and were not dividends in the proper sense as in the instant case.” (p. 182.)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““No policy of life insurance shall be issued or delivered in this State, or be issued by a life insurance company organized under the laws of this State, unless the same shall contain provisions substantially as follows: * * * “7. A provision which, in event of default in premium payments, after premiums shall have been paid for three full years, shall secure to the owner of the policy a stipulated form of insurance, the net value of which shall be at least equal to the reserve at the date of default on the policy, and on any dividend additions thereto, specifying the mortality table and rate of interest adopted for computing such reserve, less a sum not more than two and one-half per cent of the amount insured by the policy and of any existing dividend additions thereto, and less any existing indebtedness to the company on the policy. Such provision shall stipulate that the policy may be surrendered to the company at its home office within one month from date of default for a specified cash value at least equal to the sum which would otherwise be available for the purchase of insurance, as aforesaid, and may stipulate that the company may defer payment for not more than six months after the application therefor is made. This provision shall not be required in term insurances.””
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.