Beautytuft, Inc., Jorges Carpet Mills, Inc., and Moccasin Bend Carpet Mills, Inc. v. Factory Insurance Association’s Empirical Analysis
431 F.2d 1122 · 1970
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2007 · most notably Moor v. County of Alameda (1973), Wells Fargo & Co. v. Wells Fargo Express Co. (1977)
24 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 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 United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co. · Rodriquez v. United States · Southern Machine Co. v. Mohasco Industries, Inc. · Jacobson v. Atlantic City Hospital
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“for only such length of time as would be required with the exercise of due diligence and dispatch to rebuild, repair or replace such part of the property herein described as has been damaged or destroyed commencing with the date of such damage or destruction and not limited with the date of expiration of this policy”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pennbarr Corp. Kilbarr Corp., in 91-5607 v. Insurance Company of North America, in 91-5608. Pennbarr Corp. Kilbarr Corp. v. Insurance Company of North America, Pennbarr Corporation and Kilbarr Corporation, Formerly Remington Rand Corporation-New Jersey and Remington Rand Corporation-Delaware, in 91-5642 · Omaha Paper Stock Company v. Harbor Insurance Company Omaha Paper Stock Company““[a]s to the 24 defendants with lesser limits on their liability, the claims arose out of the same transaction and the proofs required (except as to amount of liability) are identical in every respect. Clearly, in the interest of avoiding sheer waste of court time, these claims should be tried together.” 431 F.2d at 1128 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although a substitute plant of potentially equivalent capacity was promptly obtained, appellees’ actual losses as shown by the proof continued beyond that date; and appellees were entitled to reimbursement for such losses for the term of the theoretical replacement period as provided by the contract.”
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.