Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 159 F.3d 388 - Burrey

Burrey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
2
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably 32 Cal. 4th 491 - Metropolitan Water District v. Superior Court (2004), Marion Dale Jackson (1999)

3 district · 2 state decisions

190199020002010decided

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 26 U.S.C. § 414 (§ 1015 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)

Relies on Firestone Tire and Rubber Company v. Bruch · Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Darden · Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid · Eisenberg v. Insurance Co. of North America · Hilao v. Estate of Marcos

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. ““It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge, fine, suspend, expel, discipline, or discriminate against a participant or beneficiary for exercising any right to which he is entitled under the provisions of an employee benefit plan... or for the purpose of interfering with the attainment of any right to which such participant may become entitled under the plan...””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In Felton, we recognized that “a claim brought under § 510 is essentially an assertion that the employee was discriminated against based on either his application for insurance benefits or his pension eligibility.” We then held that “the most analogous state law claim would be wrongful termination against public policy or retaliatory discharge.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In interpreting a statutory provision, we must avoid any construction that renders some of its language superfluous.”
    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.