National Farmers Union Property and Casualty Co. v. Kovash’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently April 2012
5 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 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 65 Cal. 2d 263 - Gray v. Zurich Insurance Co. · Argonaut Southwest Insurance Company v. Maupin · 238 Cal. App. 2d 532 - Eichler Homes, Inc. v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, London · 245 Cal. App. 2d 271 - Blackfield v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, London · Applegren v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co.
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Kovash misconstrues the meaning of the clause. It does not oblige the plaintiffs to defend any groundless, false or fraudulent case against an insured; rather, it requires them to defend only those actions which come within the terms of the insurance policy, even if those actions are groundless, false or fraudulent. See Gray v. Zurich Ins. Co., 65 Cal.2d 263 , 54 Cal.Rptr. 104 , 419 P.2d 168, 175 (1966). In this case Vannet’s claim against Kovash is for intentional acts. Intentional acts are specifically excluded from coverage. Whether the claim for intentional acts is also groundless, false or fraudulent has no bearing on the duty to defend.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““ ‘The insurer’s obligation to defend must be measured by the terms of the insurance policy and the pleading of the claimant who sues the insured.... If the allegations of the claimant’s complaint would support a recovery upon a risk covered by the insurer’s policy, then the duty to defend is present.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“where an intentional act results in injuries which are the natural and probable consequences of the act, the injuries, as well as the act, are intentional. [North Dakota] thus follows the 'classic tort doctrine' for determining an insured's intent for purposes of an exclusion for intentional acts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.