Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 448 F.2d 1185 - Frank C. Joyner, American Motorists Insurance Company v. F & B Enterprises, Inc. T/a Naylor Jewelers

Frank C. Joyner, American Motorists Insurance Company v. F & B Enterprises, Inc. T/a Naylor Jewelers’s Empirical Analysis

448 F.2d 1185 · 1971

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
February 2000
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2000 · most notably Rodriguez v. Compass Shipping Co. (1981), Best v. Kelly (1994)

20 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

1501971198019902000decided

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 Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn · United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. · Greenwald v. Maryland · Mitchell v. The Etna · City Stores Co. v. Lerner Shops of District of Columbia, 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"Only if [the insurance carrier] had obtained a formal award of benefits, and Joyner had not commenced a third-party action within six months of the entry of the award [under § 33(b)], would [the carrier] have a substantive right directly against the third-party tortfeasor. This being the case, [the carrier] is not a `real party in interest' in Joyner's suit against the third-party tortfeasor." (Emphasis added.)”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"Where compensation benefits are paid without an award, and the employee commences a third-party action, what substantive right does the employer-assignee then enjoy? Does the employer-assignee retain a substantive right as against the third party? Or, is there merely a right as against the employee if the employee succeeds in his third-party action?" (Emphasis in original.) 448 F.2d at 1187 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(h) Where the employer is insured and the insurance carrier has assumed the payment of the compensation, the insurance carrier shall be subrogated to all the rights of the employer under this section.”
    2 later decisions 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.