Avery v. Wysocki’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
4 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently March 2015
4 district · 5 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 Weinisch v. Sawyer · 277 N.J. Super. 236 - Strube v. Travelers Indemn. Co. · Zelasko v. Refrigerated Food Express · 242 N.J. Super. 293 - Avery v. Arthur E. Armitage Agency · Strube v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Illinois
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in order for the subsection a immunity to apply to policies issued on and after the effective date of N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.9, the special coverage selection requirements of subsection b must be met. If the policy was issued prior to that date, the general coverage selection requirements must be met. Thus, we hold that the immunity does not apply to coverage selections made without benefit of the coverage selection form and the insured's execution thereof. [ Avery v. Wysocki, 302 N.J.Super. 186, 191 , 695 A. 2d 283 (App.Div.1997).]”
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.