Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 498 S.W.2d 368 - Imperial Insurance Company v. Ellington

Imperial Insurance Company v. Ellington’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
4
states following
March 2014
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently March 2014

17 state decisions

8019731980199020002010decided

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 A. F. Jones & Sons v. Republic Supply Co. · Cameron v. State · 64 N.J. Super. 405 - Advance Piece Dye Works, Inc. v. Travelers Indem. Co. · Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Harrison · Swanson v. Holt

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

  1. ““The effect of the two orders of May 1, 1972, was to set aside the judgment of March 8, 1972, and to substitute a new judgment in its stead. When a judgment is withdrawn and a new judgment is substituted, if such action takes place within thirty days after the rendition of the first judgment or the order overruling motion for new trial, the action of the trial court is but an exercise of its power to control its judgment; * * *.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The word “entrusted,” as used in the exclusionary provision, conveys the idea of the delivery or surrender of possession of property by one to another with a certain confidence regarding the other’s care, use or disposal of the property. [[Image here]] “Entrustment” clearly suggests the existence of a consensual bailment situation where the person delivering the property expects the person to whom possession is delivered to use the property for the purpose intended by the owner and stated by the recipient.”
    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.