Brown v. Coregis Ins. Co.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “An insurer seeking to avoid coverage through summary judgment has the burden of proof that coverage is not provided under the policy. See Gaylord Chemical Corp. v. ProPump, Inc., 98-2367 (La.App. 1st Cir.2/18/00), 753 So.2d 349, 352 ; Smith v. Terrebonne Parish Consol. Gov’t, 02-1423 (La.App. 1st Cir.7/02/03), 858 So.2d 671, 673 . Summary judgment declaring a lack of coverage under an insurance policy may not be rendered unless there is no reasonable interpretation of the policy, when applied to the undisputed material facts shown by the evidence supporting the motion, under which coverage could be afforded. Reynolds v. Select Properties, Ltd., 93-1480 (La.4/11/94), 634 So.2d 1180, 1183 ; Brown v. Coregis Ins. Co., 99-0048 (La.App. 1st Cir.2/18/00), 752 So.2d 347, 352 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 128 So. 3d 1034 - Ledet v. Campo

2. “[t]he language of the policy clearly and unambiguously excludes all coverage under the policy for any covered auto while it is leased to another ... [T]he `leased auto' exclusion ... excludes coverage, without qualification, once a covered auto is leased to another.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 927 So. 2d 1200 - LaFleur v. Aftco Enterprises, Inc.

3. “[t]he provisions of this Act shall become effective on January 1, 2000, and shall apply to all actions filed on or after January 1, 2000.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brown v. Ackel