Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 343 F.3d 355 - Pedcor Management Co., Inc. Welfare Benefit Plan v. Nations Personnel of Texas, Inc.

Pedcor Management Co., Inc. Welfare Benefit Plan v. Nations Personnel of Texas, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

343 F.3d 355 · 2003

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
3
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Freudensprung v. Offshore Technical Services, Inc. (2004), UBS Financial Services, Inc. v. West Virginia University Hospitals, Inc. (2011)

12 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

200200320102020decided

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

Relies on Marks v. United States · Volt Information Sciences Inc v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University · Southland Corp. v. Keating · Green Tree Financial Corp. v. Bazzle · Mullen v. Treasure Chest Casino, LLC

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

  1. “Justice Stevens did express his agreement, however, with the principle laid down by the plurality that arbitrators should be the first ones to interpret the parties' agreement. As a result, the plurality's governing rationale in conjunction with Justice Stevens's support of that rationale substantially guides our consideration of this dispute.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]o the extent that the issue of consolidation in arbitration is analogous to class arbitration, Green Tree 's holding that arbitrators, not courts, decide whether an agreement provides for class arbitration would appear to overrule [a prior Fifth Circuit case holding that a court should determine whether a contract provides for consolidated arbitration]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “for if it is right, then the South Carolina court's holding [that the contracts were si lent] is flawed on its own terms.” [footnote omitted]. This preliminary analysis appears to be in response to the dissent's (and petitioner's) argument to the contrary. But even if the South Carolina court’s holding is”
    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.