Central States Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund Howard McDougall v. Midwest Motor Express Inc Mme Inc Midnite Express Inc Express Cartage Inc’s Empirical Analysis
181 F.3d 799 · 1999
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. Reimer Express World Corporation (2000), Sapperstein v. Hager (1999)
5 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
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. § 1001 (§ 2 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. § 1381 (§ 4201 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1401 (§ 4221 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1461 (§ 4402 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City · Federal Communications Commission v. Beach Communications, Inc. · Usery v. Turner Elkhorn Mining Co. · Concrete Pipe & Products of Cal., Inc. v. Construction Laborers Pension Trust for Southern Cal. · Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. RA Gray & Co.
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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]rguments not developed in any meaningful way are waived”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.