Trustees of the Central Pension Fund of the International Union of Operating Engineers & Participating Employers v. Wolf Crane Service, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
374 F.3d 1035 · 2004
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Milwaukee Brewery Workers' Pension Plan v. Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co. · Anchorage Associates v. Virgin Islands Board of Tax Review · Iam National Pension Fund Benefit Plan v. Stockton Tri Industries · Trustees of the Amalgamated Insurance Fund v. Geltman Industries, 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““district court cannot base the entry of summary judgment on the mere fact that the motion was unopposed but, rather, must consider the merits of the motion.” [United States v. One Piece of Real Property Located at 5800 RW 74th Ave., 363 F.3d 1099 ,] 1101 [(11th Cir.2004) ] .... Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e) provides that where “ ‘the adverse party does not respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against the adverse party.’ ” Id. at 1101 (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e)) (emphasis in the original).”
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.