Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 866 F.2d 1060 - Universal Underwriters Insurance Company v. McMahon Chevrolet-Oldsmobile Inc D

Universal Underwriters Insurance Company v. McMahon Chevrolet-Oldsmobile Inc D’s Empirical Analysis

866 F.2d 1060 · 1989

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
December 2015
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2015

1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

201989199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 2201

Relies on Hazen v. Pasley · Kelly v. State Automobile Insurance · Birrenkott v. Mc Manamay · Bernard v. Wisconsin Automobile Insurance · 584 F. Supp. 369 - American Family Insurance Group v. Howe

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

  1. “Such an interpretation of the exemption clause would mean that the policy offered greater protection from liability to one who obtained the consent of the assured to use his vehicle than it offered to the assured himself. It is the opinion of this court that when the clause in the policy protecting any person operating the insured vehicle with the consent of the assured is invoked, that the person invoking said clause is placed in the same position as the named assured.”
    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.