Gendron v. Calvert Fire Ins. Co.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

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

1. ““Under the terms of the policy it is not necessary that the insured actually receive notice. So, it must be said that mailing is all that is required. Whether such notice be actually received by the insured is unimportant. Raiken v. Commercial Casualty Co., N.J.Sup., 135 A. 479 ; and Naify v. Pacific Indemnity Co., 11 Cal.2d 5 , 76 P.2d 663 , 115 A.L.R. 476 . Where the insurer has strictly complied with the terms of the policy with reference thereto, failure to receive notice will not render the attempted cancellation ineffective. See Appleman on Automobile Insurance p. 476; Trinity Universal Ins. Co. v. Willrich, 1942, 13 Wash.2d 263 , 124 P.2d 950 , 142 A.L.R. 1 ; Frontier-Pontiac, Inc., v. Dubuque Fire & Marine Ins. Co., Tex.Civ.App., 166 S.W.2d 746 .””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Selken v. Northland Insurance Company · Midwestern Ins. Co. v. Cathey

2. ““There is no statute in this state which prescribes, limits, or restricts the manner of giving notice of cancellation of casualty insurance policies of the kind with which we are here concerned, and we are aware of no reason prompted by public policy which would prevent persons from voluntarily entering into a contract containing conditions such as those set forth in the cancellation clause of the policy here in question. “While we have no decision in this state directly upon the question here presented, the more recent, and we think the better reasoned, cases from other jurisdictions sustain the validity of such cancellation clauses and hold that the mailing of written notice, in accordance with the provisions of such a clause, is sufficient, whether or not such notice is actually received by the insured.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Medford v. Pacific National Fire Insurance

3. ““There is likewise no merit to appellant’s contention that there should have been a tender of the unearned premium before cancellation could become effective. And, under the circumstances of this case, no significance can attach to the fact that the refund of unearned premium was sent to the Commercial Credit Corporation and thereafter applied by it upon appellant’s indebtedness.” •”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Woodard v. Calvert Fire Ins. Co.