International Insurance v. Duryee’s Empirical Analysis
96 F.3d 837 · 1996
Citation profile
7 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 2018
7 federal appellate ·
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 Securities & Exchange Commission v. National Securities, Inc. · Group Life & Health Insurance v. Royal Drug Co. · Union Labor Life Insurance v. Pireno · United States Department of Treasury v. Fabe · Terral v. Burke Construction Co.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t is evident that § 3927.05 was not enacted so much “for the purpose of regulating the business of insurance” as for the parochial purpose of regulating a foreign insurer’s choice of forum and punishing the insurer for going into federal court. The McCarran-Ferguson Act was not meant to protect a statute so tangentially related to insurance from the general rule of federal law supremacy. If any statute escapes Fabe’s broad definitional construct, it is the statute as issue here.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“it cannot fairly be said that choice of forum between state and federal court, within a state”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.