Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 446 F.3d 1052 - Turgeau v. Administrative Review Board

Turgeau v. Administrative Review Board’s Empirical Analysis

446 F.3d 1052 · 2006

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
March 2021
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 6 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently March 2021

7 federal appellate · 6 district ·

90200620102020decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 49 U.S.C. § 42121 · 5 U.S.C. § 706

Relies on Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams · Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Taylor · Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc. · Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs

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

  1. “A completely preempted claim “becomes a federal claim and can be the basis for removal jurisdiction.” Coldesina v. Estate of Simper, 407 F.3d 1126, 1137 (10th Cir.2005). “[A] state law claim is only ‘completely preempted’ under Taylor if it can be recharacterized as a claim under [federal law].” See Felix v. Lucent Tech., Inc., 387 F.3d 1146, 1156 (10th Cir.2004); accord Schmeling [v. NOR-DAM ], 97 F.3d [1336] at 1342 [(10th Cir.1996) ] (holding that tension in Supreme Court cases can be resolved by reading “complete preemption” as a term of art — “a description of the specific situation in which a federal law not only preempts a state law to some degree but also substitutes a federal cause of action for the state cause of action, thereby manifesting Congress’s intent to permit removal”).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the 'complete preemption' doctrine has been referred to as a corollary or an exception to the well pleaded complaint rule” and that”
    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.