Senior’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently January 2022
6 district ·
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 United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers · Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala. · Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. Schoonejongen · Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As the First Circuit has stated, The interpretation of the provisions of an ERISA benefit plan proceeds under federal substantive law, and is guided by common sense principles of contract interpretation, although principles from the law of trusts are employed in certain cases. The rules of interpretation of ERISA welfare benefit plans when dealing with unambiguous terms are uncontroversial. Under ERISA, unambiguous language in a plan is enforced according to its terms. The question of whether an ERISA plan term is ambiguous is generally a question of law for the judge. It is also the rule that ambiguity in a plan term does not necessarily foreclose summary judgment, as when the evidence presented about the parties’ intended meaning is so one-sided that no reasonable person could decide the contrary.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The plaintiffs rely on an old Sixth Circuit decision, UAW v. Yard-Man, 716 F.2d 1476 (6th Cir.1983), which that circuit has since held does not stand for the proposition that there is a presumption in favor of vesting benefits. In Yolton [v. El Paso Tenn. Pipeline Co. 435 F.3d 571 (6th Cir.2006) ], the court said: “All that Yard-Man' and subsequent cases instruct is that the Court should apply ordinary principles of contract interpretation.” Id. at 580.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The labor arbitrator’s source of law is not confined to the express provisions of the contract, as the industrial common law-the practices of the industry and the shop-is equally a part of the collective bargaining agreement although not expressed in it.”
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.