58 Cal. 2d 487 - Russell v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 3 district · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently January 2015 · most notably 75 Cal. App. 4th 739 - Commerce v. Chubb (1999), 254 Cal. App. 2d 647 - Kossian v. American Nat. Ins. Co. (1967)
4 federal appellate · 3 district · 42 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
Relies on People v. Lyons · 57 Cal. 2d 381 - Simmons v. Civil Service Employees Insurance · Harrison v. Pepper · 7 Cal. 2d 718 - Alexander v. Security-First National Bank · Schilbach v. Schilbach
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It has been held that where the policy of insurance purports to cover the interest of all cotenants, the question of the right of the noninsuring cotenant to a part of the proceeds, upon occurrence of a loss, is dependent upon equitable circumstances. ( Miles v. Miles [1924], 211 Ala. 26 [ 99 So. 187, 190 ]; Currier v. North British etc. Co. [1953], 98 N.H. 366 [ 101 A.2d 266, 267 ]; Farmer's Mut. Fire & Lightning Ins. Co. v. Crowley [1945] 354 Mo. 649 , 190 S.W.2d 250, 253 [4-5].) On the other hand, it also has been held that the mere fact that the proceeds of a fire insurance policy equal the full value of the property destroyed does not entitle the owners of noninsured interests in that property to recover a part of those proceeds. ( Board of Education v. Winding Gulf Collieries [4th Cir. 1945], supra, 152 F.2d 382, 384 [2]; Rogge v. Menard County Mutual Fire Insurance Co. [1960], supra, 184 F. Supp. 289, 294 ; Murray v. Webster [1951], supra, 256 Ala. 248 [ 54 So.2d 505, 508 [3]]; Farmers' Mut. Fire & Lightning Ins. Co. v. Crowley, supra , (Mo.) [ 354 Mo. 649 ] 190 S.W.2d 250, 252 [6]; Underwood v. Fortune [1928], supra, (Mo. App.) 9 S.W.2d 845 , 856[5]; Gorman's Estate [1936], 321 Pa. 292 [296] [ 184 A. 86, 87 ].) In the instant case, even though the amount of the proceeds obtained from the policy of insurance represented the full value of the property destroyed, no equitable considerations exist which require a determination, as a matter of law, that the plaintiff was e”
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.