595 So. 2d 331 - Kellams v. Oliver’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Hemel v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. · Harmon v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company · Bowab v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co. · Colonial Pipeline Company v. Agerton · Covington v. Loffland Bros. Co.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... The coverage provided under this Subsection shall not provide protection for any of the following: (i) Damage where there is no actual physical contact between the covered motor vehicle and an uninsured motor vehicle, unless the injured party can show, by an independent and disinterested witness, that the injury was the result of the actions of the driver of another vehicle whose identity is unknown or who is uninsured or underinsured.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“accident is stronger evidence that the public policy considerations of the U.M. statute were intended to include full recovery for bodily injury to innocent victims, such as the decedent in the case sub judice. To provide full recovery for property damage in”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.