Staser v. Fulton’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 state decisions

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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We recognize that we upheld family exclusion provisions in insurance contracts prior to the enactment of the MVRA. [Citations omitted.] However, when the legislature stated the policy behind the MVRA and set forth its requirements it specified no exclusions from minimum coverage. ... Neither the drafters of the Uniform Act nor the writers of Kentucky’s MVRA included sections permitting exclusions to the minimum required tort liability coverage. The effect of these omissions is similarly clear. Neither intended that the minimum tort liability coverage be diluted or eliminated by exclusions. An exclusionary clause in an insurance contract which reduces below minimum or eliminates either of these coverages effectively renders a driver uninsured to the extent of reduction or elimination. Because the stated purpose of the MVRA is to assure that a driver be insured to a minimum level, such an exclusion provision contravenes the pur pose and policy of the compulsory insurance act. (Emphasis added.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mosley v. West American Insurance Co.

2. “The cases which uphold the validity of family exclusion provisions are overruled to the extent that they dilute or eliminate the minimum coverage requirements of the MVRA.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Marley