Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 493 U.S. 165 - Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Sperling

Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Sperling’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

1,634
cited by 1,634 later decisions
17
cited 17 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
July 2025
most recently cited

140 federal appellate · 316 district · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,634 later decisions (17 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2025 · most notably Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents (2000), Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo (2016)

140 federal appellate · 316 district · 26 state decisions

90601990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedSperling v. Hoffman-La Roche Inc. (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956) · 29 U.S.C. § 216 · 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 623 (§ 4 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 626 (§ 7 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)

Relies on Link v. Wabash Railroad · Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger · Osborn v. President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States · Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Independent Federation of Flight Attendants

Cited together with Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa · Mooney v. Aramco Services Co. · Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co. · Gulf Oil Co. v. Bernard · Hoffmann v. Sbarro, Inc.

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 1,634 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “An action ... may be maintained against any employer ... in any Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction by any one or more employees for and in behalf of himself or themselves and other employees similarly situated. No employee shall be a party plaintiff to any such action unless he gives his consent in writing to become such a party and such consent is filed in the court in which such action is brought.”
    60 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A collective action allows ... plaintiffs the advantage of lower individual costs to vindicate rights by the pooling of resources. The judicial system benefits by efficient resolution in one proceeding of common issues of law and fact arising from the same alleged ... activity.”
    41 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[D]istrict courts have discretion, in appropriate cases, to implement 29 U.S.C. § 216 (b)... by facilitating notice to potential plaintiffs.”
    6 later decisions 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.