Boseman v. Connecticut General Life Insurance’s Empirical Analysis
301 U.S. 196 · 1937
Citation profile
79 federal appellate · 39 district · 206 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 440 later decisions (13 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2016 · most notably Griffin v. McCoach (1941), 17 Cal. 3d 699 - Madden v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (1976)
79 federal appellate · 39 district · 206 state decisions — followed in 33 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
reviewedConnecticut General Life Ins. v. Boseman (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Swift v. Tyson · Allgeyer v. State of Louisiana · Home Ins Co v. Dick · Wayman v. Southard · Pritchard Ex'X v. Norton
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 440 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Employers regard group insurance not only as protection at low cost for their employees but also as advantageous to themselves in that it makes for loyalty, lessens turn-over and the like. When procuring the policy, obtaining applications of employees, taking payroll deduction orders, reporting changes in the insured group, paying premiums and generally in doing whatever may serve to obtain and keep the insurance in force, employers act not as agents of the insurer but for their employees or for themselves.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * But the certificate is not a part of the contract of, or necessary to, the insurance. It is not included among the documents declared ‘to constitute the entire con tract of insurance.’ Petitioner was insured on the taking effect of the policy long before the issue of the certificate. It did not affect any of the terms of the policy. It was issued to the end that the insured employee should have the insurer’s statement of specified facts in respect of protection to which he had become entitled under the policy. It served merely as evidence of the insurance of the employee. Petitioner’s rights and respondent’s liability would have been the same if the policy had not provided for issue of the certificate. * * * ””
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“everywhere it shall have the same meaning and give the same protection and that inequalities and confusion liable to result from applications of diverse state laws”
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.