Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 146 F.3d 617 - Marolt v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc.

Marolt v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

146 F.3d 617 · 1998

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
1
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

41 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably King v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company (2005), Jebian v. Hewlett-Packard Co. Employee Benefits Organization Income Protection Plan (2003)

41 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions

510199820002010decided

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

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 1022 (§ 102 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1133 (§ 503 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)

Relies on Firestone Tire and Rubber Company v. Bruch · Donaho v. FMC Corp. · Finley v. Special Agents Mutual Benefit Ass'n, Inc. · Anderson v. Alpha Portland Industries, Inc. · Richardson v. Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund

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

  1. “to be sandbagged by after-the-fact plan interpretations devised for purposes of litigation.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “ignore ERISA plan interpretations that did not actually furnish the basis for a plan administrator's benefits decision,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[w]hen summary plan description provisions conflict with formal plan provisions, the summary plan provisions prevail as a matter of law.”
    2 later decisions 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.