Red Ball Leasing, Inc. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A volitional act does not become an accident simply because the insured’s negligence prompted the act. Injury that is caused directly by negligence must be distinguished from injury that is caused by a deliberate and contemplated act initiated at least in part by the actor’s negligence at some earlier point. The former injury may be an accident. However, the latter injury, because it is intended and the negligence is attenuated from the volitional act, is not an accident. In this case, it is clear that Red Ball intended to repossess the [ ] trucks. A plain reading of the policy discloses that what must be “neither expected nor intended” is the damage-, knowledge of the legal consequences is not material. Even if the mistake in Red Ball’s accounting procedures triggered the chain of events that ultimately led to the repossession, the decision to take the trucks — an intentional act of Red Ball — is not an ‘accident’ under the terms of the insurance policy.”

   8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Massachusetts Bay Insurance v. Vic Koenig Leasing, Inc. · Property-Owners Insurance Co. v. Virk Boyz Liquor Stores, LLC

2. “[t]he first term that requires analysis is 'accident,' because in order to be an 'occurrence' the action must be an 'accident.' " 915 F.2d at 309; cf. Patrick v. Head of the Lakes Cooperative Electric Association, 98 Wis.2d 66, 295 N.W.2d 205, 207 (App.1980) (occurrence and accident are not synonymous). In short, the term "accident”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. City of Jasper, Indiana v. Employers Insurance of Wausau, a Mutual Company · Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. v. Everett I. Brown Co.

3. “Ejusdem generis principles draw on the sensible notion that words such as `or other invasion of the right of private occupancy' are intended to encompass actions of the same general type as, though not specifically embraced within, `wrongful entry or eviction.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. New Castle County De v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh Pa · Dryden Oil Company of New England, Inc. v. Travelers Indemnity Co.