10 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 2013–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
United States Department of Treasury v. Fabegreen2 sentences2020The insurance carriers cover that risk in the amount dictated by state law.62 60 We applied the Pireno factors in Fredericksburg to assist with our analysis of McCarran–Ferguson’s first clause, noting that they were “non-dispositive.” 461 S.W.3d at 521 . 61 Fabe, 508 U.S. at 503–04. 62 In Genord v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan, the Sixth Circuit held that McCarran–Ferguson did not shield Blue Cross from a federal civil RICO claim. 440 F.3d 802 , 803, 809 (6th Cir. 2006). 2020The insurance carriers cover that risk in the amount dictated by state law.62 60 We applied the Pireno factors in Fredericksburg to assist with our analysis of McCarran–Ferguson’s first clause, noting that they were “non-dispositive.” 461 S.W.3d at 521 . 61 Fabe, 508 U.S. at 503–04. 62 In Genord v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan, the Sixth Circuit held that McCarran–Ferguson did not shield Blue Cross from a federal civil RICO claim. 440 F.3d 802 , 803, 809 (6th Cir. 2006). | 8 | 9 |
Union Labor Life Insurance v. Pirenogreen2 sentences2020Finally, applying the non-dispositive Pireno factors produces the same conclusion that the reimbursement scheme is not part of the “business of insurance.” See Pireno, 458 U.S. at 129 . 2015Co. v. Pireno, 458 U.S. 119, 129 (1982)).2 2 It is unclear whether courts must apply the three “business of insurance” criteria (the Pireno factors) when analyzing a state law under the MFA’s first clause. | 7 | 8 |
Fredericksburg Care Co. v. Perezgreen2 sentences2020The insurance carriers cover that risk in the amount dictated by state law.62 60 We applied the Pireno factors in Fredericksburg to assist with our analysis of McCarran–Ferguson’s first clause, noting that they were “non-dispositive.” 461 S.W.3d at 521 . 61 Fabe, 508 U.S. at 503–04. 62 In Genord v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan, the Sixth Circuit held that McCarran–Ferguson did not shield Blue Cross from a federal civil RICO claim. 440 F.3d 802 , 803, 809 (6th Cir. 2006). 2020The insurance carriers cover that risk in the amount dictated by state law.62 60 We applied the Pireno factors in Fredericksburg to assist with our analysis of McCarran–Ferguson’s first clause, noting that they were “non-dispositive.” 461 S.W.3d at 521 . 61 Fabe, 508 U.S. at 503–04. 62 In Genord v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan, the Sixth Circuit held that McCarran–Ferguson did not shield Blue Cross from a federal civil RICO claim. 440 F.3d 802 , 803, 809 (6th Cir. 2006). | 1 | 2 |
Autry v. Northwest Premium Servicesgreen2 sentences2015Premium Servs., Inc., 144 F.3d 1037 , 1044 n.5 (7th Cir.1998) ("We confess some uncertainty as to whether Fabe counsels us to employ the Pireno test in cases involving the first clause of [the MFA].”). 2015Premium Servs., Inc., 144 F.3d 1037 , 1044 n.5 (7th Cir.1998) ("We confess some uncertainty as to whether Fabe counsels us to employ the Pireno test in cases involving the first clause of [the MFA].”). | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Kentucky Assn. of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller
green
2 sentences2015Ky. Ass’n of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller, 538 U.S. 329, 340-42 , 123 S.Ct. 1471 , 155 L.Ed.2d 468 (2003). 2015Ky. Ass’n of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller, 538 U.S. 329, 340-42 , 123 S.Ct. 1471 , 155 L.Ed.2d 468 (2003). | 2 | 2015–2015 |
Genord v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan
green
2 sentences2020The insurance carriers cover that risk in the amount dictated by state law.62 60 We applied the Pireno factors in Fredericksburg to assist with our analysis of McCarran–Ferguson’s first clause, noting that they were “non-dispositive.” 461 S.W.3d at 521 . 61 Fabe, 508 U.S. at 503–04. 62 In Genord v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan, the Sixth Circuit held that McCarran–Ferguson did not shield Blue Cross from a federal civil RICO claim. 440 F.3d 802 , 803, 809 (6th Cir. 2006). 2020The insurance carriers cover that risk in the amount dictated by state law.62 60 We applied the Pireno factors in Fredericksburg to assist with our analysis of McCarran–Ferguson’s first clause, noting that they were “non-dispositive.” 461 S.W.3d at 521 . 61 Fabe, 508 U.S. at 503–04. 62 In Genord v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan, the Sixth Circuit held that McCarran–Ferguson did not shield Blue Cross from a federal civil RICO claim. 440 F.3d 802 , 803, 809 (6th Cir. 2006). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Fredericksburg Care Co. v. Perez
green
2 sentences2015Here, the court of appeals concluded that “a thorough analysis [of the MFA’s first clause] should include consideration of the Pireno factors.” 406 S.W.3d at 324 . 2015Here, the court of appeals concluded that “a thorough analysis [of the MFA’s first clause] should include consideration of the Pireno factors.” 406 S.W.3d at 324 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Group Life & Health Insurance v. Royal Drug Co.
green
2 sentences2013Royal Drug, 440 U.S. at 211 , 99 S.Ct. 1067 ; Pireno, 458 U.S. at 127 , 102 S.Ct. 3002 , While we acknowledge the distinction between the first and second clauses of section 1012(b), we believe a thorough analysis should include consideration of the Pireno factors. 2013Royal Drug, 440 U.S. at 211 , 99 S.Ct. 1067 ; Pireno, 458 U.S. at 127 , 102 S.Ct. 3002 , While we acknowledge the distinction between the first and second clauses of section 1012(b), we believe a thorough analysis should include consideration of the Pireno factors. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.