Frommert v. Conkright’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
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) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Blum v. Stenson · Ruckelshaus v. Sierra Club · Copeland v. Marshall · Sereboff v. Mid Atlantic Medical Services, Inc.
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Boxell v. Plan for Group Ins. of Verizon Commun., Inc. , 1:13-CV-089 JD, 2015 WL 4464147 , at (N.D. Ind. July 21, 2015) (quoting Jeffboat, LLC v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs , 553 F.3d 487 , 490 (7th Cir. 2009) ); Amos v. PPG Indus., Inc. , No. 05-cv-70, 2015 WL 4881459 , at (S.D. Ohio Aug. 13, 2015) ("In ascertaining the proper 'community,' district courts may look to national markets, an area of specialization, or any other market they believe is appropriate to fairly compensate attorneys in individual cases.").”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“While this action generally involved Rochester-area plaintiffs, there is also some support for plaintiffs' assertion that in certain highly specialized areas of law, such as ERISA, the relevant legal community is national in scope.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he hourly rates to be applied here are not strictly bound by what would be typical for counsel from this district.”
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.