Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 577 FSUPP2D 752 - Einhorn v. J & S, INC.

Einhorn v. J & S, INC.’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
July 2010
most recently cited

2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1301 (§ 4001 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1383 (§ 4203 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1399 (§ 4219 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)

Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers · Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. RA Gray & Co. · Texas Industries, Inc. v. Radcliff Materials, 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[i]f no arbitration proceeding has been initiated pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the amounts demanded by the plan sponsor under section 13999(b)(1) of this title shall be due and owing on the schedule set forth by the plan sponsor. The plan sponsor may bring an action in a State or Federal court of competent jurisdiction for collection.” “The Third Circuit has repeatedly held that, an employer will waive its statutory rights to dispute aspects of the Fund’s liability determination where arbitration is not demanded within the time period prescribed by the statute.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “An employer who is assessed by a union pension fund for withdrawal liability has no independent cause of action under ERISA or the MPPAA to sue a third-party for contribution or indemnification on the theory that such a party is properly the sole or joint employer for the purposes of those statutes.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.