Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 197 F.3d 929 - Charles Emmenegger

Charles Emmenegger’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
2
states following
June 2020
most recently cited

13 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently June 2020 · most notably Sanders v. Gravel Products, Inc. (2008), 105 F. Supp. 2d 1037 - In Re Lutheran Brotherhood Variable Insurance Products Co. Sales Practices Litigation (2000)

13 district · 2 state decisions

2101999200020102020decided

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 Fort Halifax Packing Co. v. Coyne · Finley v. United States · Adventure Resources, Inc. v. Holland · Kulinski v. Medtronic Bio-Medicus, Inc. · Cossette v. Minnesota Power & Light

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

  1. “an incentive plan, which also has the objectives of furthering the interests of BMT and its owner, encouraging selected managers to stay with BMT, and `compensating [those managers] for services rendered to' BMT.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “upon the happening of certain triggering events, such as retirement, disability, death, termination without cause, or takeover.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the interests of judicial economy, convenience and fairness.”
    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.