Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 307 F.3d 1020 - Lessard v. Applied Risk Management

Lessard v. Applied Risk Management’s Empirical Analysis

307 F.3d 1020 · 2002

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
December 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1140 (§ 510 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 42 U.S.C. § 12101 (§ 2 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990)

Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Taylor · Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. McClendon

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

  1. “is to 'prevent persons and entities from taking actions which might cut off or interfere with a participant's ability to collect present or future benefits or which punish a participant for exercising his or her rights under an employee benefit plan.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “for exercising any right to which he is entitled under the provisions of an employee benefit plan,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Here, Lessard’s proof of discrimination is direct and uncontroverted. Section 7.2(a) of the Agreement facially discriminates against employees who were on disability, workers’ compensation, and any other form of extended leave, explicitly excepting from its separate schedule for conditional transfer any employee who was absent from work due to vacation, holiday, or personal reasons. At the time the companies executed the Agreement, they knew that five of the six employees placed on the deferred schedule were on some form of medical leave or disability-related leave. We find that this conduct constitutes discrimination on its face.”
    1 later decision 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.