Stephenson v. Van Vleit’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 2019
15 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 591 So. 2d 342 - Schroeder v. Board of Sup'rs · 630 So. 2d 714 - Segura v. Frank · 609 So. 2d 195 - Tugwell v. State Farm Ins. Co. · Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc. · Transamerican Natural Gas Corp. v. Zapata Partnership, Ltd.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1)(a)(i) No automobile liability insurance covering liability arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of any motor vehicle shall be delivered or issued for delivery in this state with respect to any motor vehicle designed for use on public highways and required to be registered in this state or as provided in this Section unless coverage is provided therein or supplemental thereto, in not less than the limits of bodily injury liability provided by the policy, under provisions filed with and approved by the commissioner of insurance, for the protection of persons insured thereunder who are legally entitled to recover nonpunitive damages from owners or operators of uninsured or underinsured motor vehicles because of bodily injury, sickness, or disease, including death resulting therefrom; however, the coverage required under this Section is not applicable when any insured named in the policy either rejects coverage, selects lower limits, or selects economic-only coverage, in the manner provided in Item (1)(a)(ii) of this Section. . . . Such coverage need not be provided in or supplemental to a renewal . . . policy when the named insured has rejected the coverage . . . in connection with a policy previously issued to him by the same insurer or any of its affiliates. . . . (ii) Such rejection . . . shall be made only on a form prescribed by the commissioner of insurance. . . . The form signed by the insured or his legal representative which initially rejects coverage .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a policy replacing at the end of the policy period a policy previously issued and delivered by the same insurer, or the issuance and delivery of a certificate or notice extending the term of a policy beyond its policy period or term.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“an initial valid rejection of UM coverage is also valid for renewal, reinstatement, or substitute policies.”
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.