Legal Opinion

Barbara Bennett v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided September 24, 2013No. 13-3047PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge.

There are good reasons not to call an opponent’s argument “ridiculous,” which is what State Farm calls Barbara Bennett’s principal argument here. The reasons include civility; the near-certainty that overstatement will only push the reader away (especially when, as here, the hyperbole begins on page one of the brief); and that, even where the record supports an extreme modifier, “the better practice is usually to lay out the facts and let the court reach its own conclusions.” Big Dipper Entm’t, L.L.C. v. City of Warren, 641 F.3d 715, 719 (6th Cir.2011). But…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hybud Equipment Corp. v. Sphere Drake InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Robson v. Lightning Rod Mutual InsuranceOhio Court of Appeals · 1978
  3. Pipefitters Local 636 Ins. Fund v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Mich.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
  4. Rednour v. Hastings Mutual InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 2003
  5. Big Dipper Entertainment, L.L.C. v. City of WarrenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2011

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. First Weber Group, Incorporate v. Jonathan HorsfallCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
  2. Hahn v. GEICO Choice Insurance CompanyAlaska Supreme Court · 2018
  3. Christine Bearden v. Ballad HealthCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
  4. Encompass Insurance Co. v. Coast National Insurance Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  5. United States v. Justin JamesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2014

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API