Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 326 A.2d 122 - Murray v. James

Murray v. James’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
March 1988
most recently cited

1 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on DeVincentis v. Maryland Casualty Company · Steenburg v. Harry Braunstein, Inc. · Catalfano v. Higgins · Malone Freight Lines, Inc. v. Johnson Motor Lines, Inc.

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

  1. ““The modern view, which is embodied in Rule 17(a) of the Civil Rules, Del.C. Ann., of this Court is that actions should be brought in the name of the real party in interest. Prior to adoption of the no-fault insurance law, subrogated tort claims where the real party in interest was an insurance company were treated as an exception to this rule because of the policy that the existence of insurance should not be revealed to the jury, [citations omitted] The decision in DeVincentis concluded that this is no longer a persuasive consideration. Accordingly, I find that the requirements of Rule 17(a) apply, and, therefore, the subrogated insurer may proceed in its own name.” 326 A .2d at 123 . 7”
    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.