Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 113 F.3d 208 - Shannon v. Jack Eckerd Corp.

Shannon v. Jack Eckerd Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

113 F.3d 208 · 1997

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
July 2022
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently July 2022 · most notably Levinson v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance (2001), Paramore v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. (1997)

10 federal appellate · 1 district ·

1501997200020102020decided

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 Firestone Tire and Rubber Company v. Bruch · Jett v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Alabama, Inc. · Jones v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. · 764 F. Supp. 728 - Bucci v. Blue Cross-Blue Shield of Connecticut, Inc.

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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Should [the beneficiary] wish to present additional information that might affect the determination of eligibility for benefits, the proper course would be to remand to [the plan administrator] for a new determination.”) (quoting Jett, 890 F.2d at 1140 ) (bracketed alterations in original); cf. Levinson v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co., 245 F.3d 1321, 1328 (11th Cir.2001) (upholding denial of administrator's request to remand where the administrator”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “We cannot say that the district court erred in remanding for the Plan administrator to make a reasonably relevant inquiry.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[a] decision to deny benefits is arbitrary and capricious if no reasonable basis exists for the decision.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.