609 F. Supp. 1221 - Donovan v. Walton’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently February 2015 · most notably Chao v. Hall Holding Co. (2002), Flanigan v. General Electric Co. (2001)
9 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
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. § 1331 · 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1104 (§ 404 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1105 (§ 405 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1106 (§ 406 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1108 (§ 408 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1109 (§ 409 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Udall v. Tallman · Nachman Corp. v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation · Donovan v. Dillingham · Continental Airlines, Inc. v. Zimmerman
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is no violation of a trustee's fiduciary duties to take a course of action which reasonably best promotes the interest of plan participants simply because it incidentally also benefits the corporation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“simply does not prohibit a party other than a plan's participants and beneficiaries from benefitting in some measure from a prudent transaction with the plan”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“For a fiduciary to be liable for the actions of his breaching co-fiduciary, Section 405(a) of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1105 (a), provides that he must: (1) ... participate[ ] knowingly in, or knowingly undertake[ ] to conceal, an act or omission of such other fiduciary, knowing such act or omission is a breach; (2) ... by his failure to comply with section 1104(a)(1) of this title in the administration of his specific responsibilities which give rise to his status as a fiduciary, he has enabled such other fiduciary to commit a breach; or (3) ... ha[ve] knowledge of a breach by such other fiduciary, unless he makes reasonable efforts under the circumstances to remedy the breach.”
1 later decision 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.