Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 321 SW2D 56 - Mayer v. Dickerson

Mayer v. Dickerson’s Empirical Analysis

1959

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
May 2006
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Louisville & NR Co. v. MacK Mfg. Corp. · Bowling Green-Hopkinsville Bus Co. v. Adams · Wright v. Kinslow · Dunaway v. Darnell

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

  1. “Plaintiffs insist that as their insurance carrier was forced to become a party plaintiff to the action, justice demands their motion to make defendants' insurance carrier a party defendant should have been sustained. Plaintiffs overlook the fact that their policy is what is generally known as `collision' insurance, while defendants' policy covers what is known as `liability' insurance. Plaintiffs' insurance carrier had incurred liability and paid same, while defendants' insurance carrier would incur no liability until a judgment was rendered against them; therefore, it was not a real party in interest.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The territory contiguous to and including a highway not comprising a business district when the property on such highway for a distance of 300 feet or’more is in the main improved with residences or residences and buildings in -use for business.””
    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.