William Aramony v. United Way of America United Way Replacement Benefit Plan United Way Supplemental Benefits Agreement’s Empirical Analysis
254 F.3d 403 · 2001
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 8 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently December 2021 · most notably United Artists Theatre Circuit, Inc. v. Township of Warrington (2003), Lillbask Mauclaire v. State of Connecticut Department of Education S (2005)
17 federal appellate · 8 district · 4 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 26 U.S.C. § 401 (Self-Employed Individuals Tax Retirement Act of 1962) · 26 U.S.C. § 415 (§ 2004 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Firestone Tire and Rubber Company v. Bruch · Lee v. Burkhart · Schonholz v. Long Island Jewish Medical Center · Abraham Zion Corp. v. Lebow · O'Neil v. Retirement Plan for Salaried Employees of RKO General, 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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an expression of intent in a `whereas' clause of an agreement between two parties may be useful as an aid in construing the rights and obligations created by the agreement, but it cannot create any right beyond those arising from the operative terms of the document”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Courts apply the law of the case doctrine when their prior decisions in an ongoing case either expressly resolved an issue or necessarily resolved it by implication.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Even where there is no 'true conflict' between two provisions, specific words will limit the meaning of general words if it appears from the whole agreement that the parties' purpose was directed solely toward the matter to which the specific words or clause relate.”
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.