White v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.’s Empirical Analysis
356 F.2d 746 · 1966
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 10 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably Thomas v. Shelton (1984), Beckham v. Safeco Insurance Co. of America (1982)
29 federal appellate · 10 district ·
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 Meredith v. City of Winter Haven · Watson v. Employers Liability Assurance Corp. · Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. v. Elbert · Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company v. Larry Shaw, a Minor by H. L. Shaw, Next Friend, Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company v. J. H. Carson and C. M. Miller
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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““For the purposes of this section and section 1441 of this title, a corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of any State by which it has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business: Provided further, That in any direct action against the insurer of a policy or contract of liability insurance, whether incorporated or unincorporated, to which action the insured is not joined as a party-defendant, such insurer shall be deemed a citizen of the State of which the insured is a citizen, as well as of any State by which the insurer has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business.””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The report then makes clear that the words 'direct action' were used to refer to statutes such as those in Louisiana and Wisconsin which allow a party injured by the negligence of an insured to pursue his right of action against the insurer alone.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The purpose of the proposed legislation is to amend section -1332(a) of title 28, United States Code, so as to eliminate under the diversity jurisdiction of the U. S. district courts, suits on certain -tort claims in which both parties are local residents, but which, under a State “direct action” statute, may be brought directly against a foreign insurance carrier without joining the local tort-feasor as a defendant.””
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.