5 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 15 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Rodriguez v. Windsor Insurance.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rodriguez v. Windsor Insurance Anchor | green | “we refer to what the hypothetical reasonable insured would glean from the wording of the policy and the kind of insurance at issue.” | 3 |
| 2 | G & G SERVICES, INC. v. Agora Syndicate, Inc. | green | “examined the parameters of an insurer's duty to investigate and defend a third-party claim filed against its insured.” | 3 |
| 3 | Barth v. Coleman | green | “lay person's expectations of insurance coverage are of course formed by many factors besides the language of the policies themselves” | 3 |
| 4 | William J. Templeman Co. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance | green | “we do not find the term 'malicious prosecution' as deployed in the policy to be ambiguous.” | 3 |
| 5 | Heil Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. | green | “under wisconsin law, the offense of 'malicious prosecution' is not ambiguous and only a lawsuit against the insured for malicious prosecution would create an obligation to defend.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.