Wolfson v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance’s Empirical Analysis
51 F.3d 141 · 1995
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2015 · most notably Quackenbush California Insurance Commissioner v. Allstate Insurance Co (1996), Munich American Reinsurance Co. v. Crawford (1998)
16 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 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
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 109 · 15 U.S.C. § 1012 (§ 2 of the McCarran-Ferguson Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (§ 514 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Burford v. Sun Oil Co. · Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Massachusetts · New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. Council of City of New Orleans
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Whether "[l]ike the state court proceeding at issue in Colorado River, the state court conducting [Amwest's liquidation] proceeding has jurisdiction over property, [Amwest's] inadequate pool of assets;" (2) Whether "[e]xercise of the federal court's concurrent jurisdiction in this case will compromise the State's interest in [Amwest's] successful [liquidation];" (3) Whether the case will require resolving a federal statutory claim; (4) Whether the case has progressed in the federal forum to the point that "dismissal would itself constitute a waste of judicial resources and an invitation to duplicative effort;" (5) The "strong federal policy of deferring to state regulation of the insurance industry, as reflected in the McCarran-Ferguson Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1012 ."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[l]ike the state court proceeding at issue in Colorado River, the state court conducting [Amwest's liquidation] proceeding has jurisdiction over property, [Amwest's] inadequate pool of assets;”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Determining when to invoke this narrow exception involves considerations of federalism, comity, and judicial administration explored in the Supreme Court's many and varied abstention cases.”
1 later decision 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.