Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 607 F.3d 1076 - Bennett v. MIS Corp.

Bennett v. MIS Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

607 F.3d 1076 · 2010

Citation profile

86
cited by 86 later decisions
1
states following
April 2024
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 1 U.S.C. § 1 (Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002) · 28 U.S.C. § 1442

Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Boyle v. United Technologies Corp. · Willingham v. Morgan · Mesa v. California · Arizona v. Manypenny

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

  1. “(1) the defendant made a material representation; (2) the representation was false; (3) when the. defendant made the representation, the defendant knew that it was false, or made it recklessly, without knowledge of its truth as a positive assertion; (4) the defendant made the representation with the intention that the plaintiff would act upon it; (5) the plaintiff acted in reliance upon it; and (6) the plaintiff suffered damage.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]o satisfy the “acted under” requirement of § 1442(a)(1), a private person’s actions “must involve an effort to assist, or to help carry out, the duties or tasks of the federal superior.” It is not enough that a private person or- entity merely operate in an area directed, supervised and monitored by a federal regulatory agency or other such federal entity.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “First, [the contractor] must establish that it is a “person” within the meaning of the statute who “acted under a federal officer.”. Second, [it] must demonstrate that it performed the actions for which it is being, sued “under color of federal office.”- Third, [it] must show that it raised a colorable federal defense.”
    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.