Corbitt v. Diamond M. Drilling Co.’s Empirical Analysis
654 F.2d 329 · 1981
Citation profile
62 federal appellate · 3 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 142 later decisions — most recently February 2020 · most notably Theriot v. Bay Drilling Corp. (1986), Fontenot v. Mesa Petroleum Co. (1986)
62 federal appellate · 3 district · 16 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 United States v. Seckinger · Tri-State Oil Tool Industries, Inc. v. Delta Marine Drilling Co. · Hicks v. Ocean Drilling & Exploration Co. · Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation v. The Mobile Drilling Barge or Vessel Known as Mr. Charlie Etc., Signal Oil & Gas Company, Third-Party v. Ocean Drilling & Exploration Company, Third-Party Claimant-Appellee, Forestoil Corporation, Third-Party
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 142 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] contract of indemnity should be construed to cover all losses, damages, or liabilities which reasonably appear to have been within the contemplation of the parties”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“may not look beyond the written language of the document to determine the intent of the parties unless the disputed contract provision is ambiguous.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he contract need not contain any special words to evince an intention to create a right of indemnity for independent contractual liabilities. We hold only that it must clearly express such a purpose. In this case, there is nothing in the contractual language itself or in the realities of the situation in which the parties executed [the indemnification agreement] which reflects any such intention.”
4 later decisions 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.