Sembos v. Philips Components’s Empirical Analysis
376 F.3d 696 · 2004
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (§ 2 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (§ 514 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)
Relies on Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. McClendon · Radue v. Kimberly-Clark Corp. · Rogers v. City of Chicago · Cefalu v. Bf Goodrich Company · Box v. A & P Tea Co.
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.
“we need not delve into the intricacies of ERISA preemption in this case.”
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.