Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 219 NJSUPER 339 - State v. Burten

State v. Burten’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
January 1997
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (§ 2 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1003 (§ 4 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1051 (§ 201 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (§ 514 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)

Relies on Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul · Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Massachusetts · Alessi v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc. · New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce v. New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission

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

  1. “an employee benefit plan is preempted. The Law Division explained: In order to avoid being preempted, a state law, in addition to being an exercise of traditional police powers, must also affect the plan”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.