Fmc Corporation v. Holliday’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
544 federal appellate · 237 district · 370 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 2,053 later decisions (30 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc. (1992), Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. McClendon (1990)
544 federal appellate · 237 district · 370 state decisions — followed in 35 states
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
reviewedthe decision below (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1011 (§ 1 of the McCarran-Ferguson Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1012 (§ 2 of the McCarran-Ferguson Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (§ 2 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (§ 514 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · Pilot Life Insurance v. Dedeaux · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos. · Fidelity Federal Savings and Loan Association v. D Cuesta
Cited together with Pilot Life Insurance v. Dedeaux · Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. McClendon · Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Massachusetts · Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Taylor
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 2,053 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an employee benefit plan governed by ERISA. The saving clause returns to the States the power to enforce those state laws that”
199 later decisions quote this exact passage“§ 1720. Subrogation In actions arising out of the maintenance or use of a motor vehicle, there shall be no right of subrogation or reimbursement from a claimant's tort recovery with respect to workers’ compensation benefits, benefits available under section 1711 (relating to required benefits), 1712 (relating to availability of benefits) or 1715 (relating to availability of adequate limits) or benefits paid or payable by a program, group contract or other arrangement whether primary or excess under section 1719 (relating to coordination of benefits). 75 Pa.C.S. § 1720.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Except as provided in subparagraph (B), nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to exempt or relieve any person from any law of any State which regulates insurance, banking, or securities.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.