Delaye v. Agripac, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
39 F.3d 235 · 1994
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 11 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably Cvelbar v. CBI Illinois Inc. (1997), Collins v. Ralston Purina Co. (1998)
18 federal appellate · 11 district · 1 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Fort Halifax Packing Co. v. Coyne · Massachusetts v. Morash · Scott v. Gulf Oil Corp. · Younger v. Younger · Bogue v. Ampex Corp.
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Delaye’s contract does not implicate an ongoing administrative scheme. Once Agripac decided to terminate Delaye, the severance calculation became one akin to that in Fort Halifax — a straightforward computation of a one-time obligation. The obligation was either to pay Delaye his regular salary prorated to the date of his termination, if he was terminated for cause; or pay him a fixed monthly amount for twelve to twenty-four months according to a set formula, plus accrued vacation pay and insurance benefits, if he was terminated without cause. While payment could continue for as long as two years, there is nothing discretionary about the timing, amount or form of the payment. Sending De-laye, a single employee, a check every month plus continuing to pay his insurance premiums for the time specified in the employment contract does not rise to the level of an ongoing administrative scheme.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“); Delaye v. Agripac, Inc., 39 F.3d 235 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 115 S.Ct. 1402 , 131 L.Ed.2d 289 (1995); Sherrod v. General Motors Corp., 33 F.3d 636 (6th Cir.1994); Angst v. Mack Trucks, Inc., 969 F.2d 1530 (3d Cir.1992); Fontenot v. NL Indus., Inc., 953 F.2d 960 (5th Cir. 1992); Fludgate v. Management Technologies, Inc., 885 F.Supp. 645 (S.D.N.Y.1995); Tischmann v. ITT/Sheraton Corp., 882 F.Supp. 1358 (S.D.N.Y.1995), with Swinney v. General Motors Corp., 46 F.3d 512 (6th Cir.1995) (ERISA”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Id. Second, Bogue 's severance package covered ten top executives and thus the employer would need to make ten separate discretionary determinations. Id. 12 PACE argues that the Stay On Letter contained two”
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.