Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 653 SO2D 185 - Nelson v. Ragan

Nelson v. Ragan’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
October 2002
most recently cited

12 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 609 So. 2d 195 - Tugwell v. State Farm Ins. Co. · 585 So. 2d 534 - Henson v. Safeco Ins. Companies · Garcia v. Certified Lloyds Ins. Co. · 417 So. 2d 471 - Oncale v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. · 647 So. 2d 1192 - Thomas v. Goodson

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.

  1. “We read the Henson decision to require that the application present the applicant with a separate or conspicuous rejection form that informs the applicant of his options regarding UM coverage and requires the applicant to do some affirmative act rejecting coverage, such as checking the rejection box himself or initialing or signing the rejection. The rejection form, or more properly speaking, the "elect to reject" form signed by Nelson ... complied with the mandates of Henson and Tugwell, supra, which require that the applicant be given an opportunity to make a meaningful selection from the statutory options: (1) UM coverage equal to bodily injury limits in the policy; (2) UM coverage lower than bodily injury limits in the policy; or (3) no UM coverage. As in the Thomas application, this Aetna policy application had a separate form for UM options. The form provided information on Louisiana's mandatory UM coverage absent a rejection. The form also provided the insured the option of selecting UM coverage equal to liability limits of the policy or less than liability limits along with the opportunity to reject UM coverage. Further, the form contained an admonition to read carefully and indicate the selection of coverage. Somewhat distinguishable from the form in Thomas, supra, this form does not state that UM coverage will be provided unless the form was filled in and signed. Nevertheless, the form does state that the insurer will, as required by law, supply UM coverage equal to”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “that the application present the applicant with a separate or conspicuous rejection form that informs the applicant of his options regarding UM coverage and requires the applicant to do some affirmative act rejecting coverage, such as checking the rejection box himself or initialing or signing the rejection.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[a] person who signs a written document is presumed to have knowledge and understanding of that which he signs.”
    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.