Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 8 F.3d 760 - Golden Door Jewelry Creations, Inc. v. Lloyds Underwriters Non-Marine Ass'n

Golden Door Jewelry Creations, Inc. v. Lloyds Underwriters Non-Marine Ass'n’s Empirical Analysis

8 F.3d 760 · 1993

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently January 2017

8 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

80199320002010decided

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 Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · 424 So. 2d 758 - Hicks v. State · Lighting Fixture & Electric Supply Co. v. Continental Insurance · 408 So. 2d 1091 - Leonard v. Leonard · Wheat, First Securities, Inc. v. Green

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

  1. “the final judgments entered on behalf of consignors must be vacated. The case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “the conclusion is inescapable: the jewelers' block policy includes coverage for the legal liability of the assured deriving from the loss of the property.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Lloyds ... assumed that consignors would have coverage; the coverage they anticipated, however, was within the terms and exclusions of the policy.”
    2 later decisions 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.