3 F. Supp. 2d 982 - Cagle v. Flick’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (§ 2 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Firestone Tire and Rubber Company v. Bruch · New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is clear that Indiana’s “common fund” doctrine does not apply as the court may not employ federal common law when the plain language of the ERISA plan invests the plan administrator with discretion to interpret the plan, and the administrator has not interpreted the plan in an arbitrary and capricious manner.”
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.