Schwoch v. Sutor’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 418 So. 2d 575 - Hoefly v. Government Employees Ins. Co. · 513 So. 2d 1126 - Roger v. Estate of Moulton · 404 So. 2d 948 - AIU Ins. Co. v. Roberts · 461 So. 2d 1051 - Snider v. Murray
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a particular policy issued or to be issued,”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“While it is true that the Supreme Court mentioned that the rejection should refer to a particular policy issued or to be issued, this requirement is not fatal to the rejection in this case. The fact that the rejection form fails to list a policy number, does not invalidate the rejection. The rejection form clearly rejects uninsured motorist coverage insofar as coverage applies in Louisiana and necessarily refers to the one particular policy which, absent a valid rejection, would provide such coverage in Louisiana. Inclusion of the policy number on the rejection form was not necessary. Schwoch v. Sutor, 559 So.2d 552, 554 (La.App. 2 Cir.1990). (Emphasis added).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“since policy numbers could change upon renewal or substitution.”
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.