Harris v. Dunn’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
12 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 634 So. 2d 1180 - Reynolds v. Select Properties, Ltd. · 784 So. 2d 637 - Blackburn v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. · 701 So. 2d 1308 - Shephard on Behalf of Shephard v. Scheeler · 450 So. 2d 654 - Pique v. Saia · Boland v. West Feliciana Parish Police Jury
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... Seeking to deny coverage, both US-Agencies and State Farm filed motions for summary judgment on the grounds that Latiffany intentionally struck the vehicle and Shatara. The trial court granted both motions. Shatara now appeals the dismissal of her claims as to these two defendants. Because we find that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether Latiffany acted intentionally, we reverse the summary judgments and remand for further proceedings.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Harris v. Dunn“This issue of fact also means that summary judgment in favor of State Farm is also not warranted. We make no ruling on State Farm’s argument that its UM coverage is not triggered when an intentional act, rather than an “accident,” causes damage or injury to persons entitled to UM coverage under its policy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Harris v. Dunn
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.