Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 553 F.3d 913 - Sandoz v. Cingular Wireless LLC

Sandoz v. Cingular Wireless LLC’s Empirical Analysis

553 F.3d 913 · 2008

Citation profile

98
cited by 98 later decisions
3
states following
July 2021
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 16 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 98 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably O'Brien v. ED Donnelly Enterprises Inc. (2009), Simmons v. United Mortgage & Loan Investment, LLC (2011)

19 federal appellate · 16 district · 4 state decisions

920200820102020decided

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. § 1292 · 29 U.S.C. § 206 (Equal Pay Act of 1963) · 29 U.S.C. § 216

Relies on Warth v. Seldin · Sosna v. Iowa · United States Parole Commission v. Geraghty · Deposit Guaranty National Bank v. Roper · Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Sperling

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

  1. “An action ... may be maintained ... 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.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Sandoz cannot represent any other employees until they affirmatively opt in to the collective action. This means that when Cingular made its offer of judgment, Sandoz represented only herself, and the offer of judgment fully satisfied her individual claims. If our analysis stopped there, Sandoz’s case would be moot. Sandoz, 553 F.3d at 919 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “based on the pleadings and affidavits of the parties,”
    2 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.