Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 434 F.2d 926 - Rowell v. Hodges

Rowell v. Hodges’s Empirical Analysis

434 F.2d 926 · 1970

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
September 2002
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently September 2002

2 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

301970198019902000decided

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 Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · 65 Cal. 2d 263 - Gray v. Zurich Insurance Co. · Crum v. Anchor Casualty Co. · Cook v. Ohio Casualty Insurance Company · 111 Ga. App. 480 - State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Keene

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

  1. “[T]he general rule does not take into account the possibility that a divergence may exist between the facts as alleged in the Petition and the actual facts as they are known to the insurer, and that the general rule does not apply where, as here, the uncontrovertible and indisputable facts, ascertained by the insurance company long before the action is commenced and confirmed by its own insured, demonstrate that there never was any insurance coverage for the casualty alleged in the first place, and that, therefore, the refusal to defend does not constitute a breach of contract but, on the contrary, is a justified refusal. * * * In a sense, to say here that the Garnishee must gauge its obligation strictly by the pleading called a Complaint, and put blinders on, so to speak, to what it actually knows and has definitely ascertained, is somewhat archaic, considering the nature of our present system of notice pleading.”
    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.