Trayco Insurance v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Mayor of Baltimore v. Chase · Reese v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance · Smelser v. Criterion Insurance · Comptroller of the Treasury v. Science Applications International Corp. · Ishola v. State
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Additionally, the phrase “has not been reimbursed” mirrors other language in the statute that we have interpreted in the past. Specifically, in Gable , we explained that the term “has recovered,” referred to WC benefits “actually received ... not [ ] future benefits!,]” and that the use of the term “has recovered,” coupled with the absence of the word “recoverable” in the statute “indicate! ] that ... the insurer’s right to offset [WC] benefits is contingent upon [the insured’s] receipt [of the WC benefits].” Gable, 313 Md. at 704, 706 , 548 A.2d at 136-38 . Following this method of interpretation, in the present case, the WC provider must have been actually reimbursed, and mere reimbursement in the future is insufficient under the statute.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[W]hether [Ins. § 19-513(e) ] requires an insurance company to deduct recovered workers’ compensation (“WC”) benefits from the benefits payable to an insured for uninsured motorist coverage (“UM”) and personal injury protection (“PIP”) when the insured has not reimbursed its WC provider, the WC provider claims the insured will need to reimburse it from any UM or PIP recovery, and the insured intends to reimburse the WC provider in the future.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“For the following reasons, we hold that CL § 12-302 is a statutory specialty and actions on it are accorded a twelve-year limitations period. * I. Facts and Procedural History Pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Certification of Questions of Law Act, CJP §§ 12-601 to 12-613,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Price v. Murdy
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.