Jensen’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
16 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Broussard, Equitable Life Assurance Society v. Crysler (1995)
16 district · 3 state decisions
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 Firestone Tire and Rubber Company v. Bruch · Allied Chemical & Alkali Workers of America, Local Union No. 1 v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. · Associated Grocers, Inc. v. Washington · FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of Dallas · Wade v. Shook
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“That intent [of the settlor] is first sought by careful examination of the trust clause in question, giving the words in that clause their ordinary meanings. If the construction question cannot be resolved by reference to the clause alone, the court will examine the entire trust instrument to determine the creator’s intent and purposes.... The third step becomes necessary when the intent or meaning of the settlor ... cannot be determined by reference to the provisions of the trust instrument itself. Extrinsic evidence will be admitted by the court to assist it in determining the meaning and effect of the particular clause.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Unless otherwise expressly provided therein, amendments [to the company’s pensioner medical plan] shall not be applicable to persons who are receiving pensions.” Jensen, 38 F.3d at 949 . The court reasoned that this language left”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“To put the issue in trust law terms, either the reservation-of-rights provisions in the plan documents must be construed as conferring only a.power to modify plan benefits prospectively (that is, for salaried employees not yet retired), or SIPCO relinquished the broader power to modify benefits for those already retired.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Stearns v. NCR Corp.
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.