Plante v. Dake’s Empirical Analysis
2015
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1395Y (§ 1862 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Raines v. Byrd · W.R. Huff Asset Management Co. v. Deloitte & Touche LLP · Glover v. Liggett Group, Inc. · Malik v. Meissner
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[b]ecause interpretation of the federal Medicare Act presents a federal question,' the district court had subject matter jurisdiction to determine whether that act created a cause of action in favor of Pacificare against the [defendants].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Federal question jurisdiction exists ... over a claim stating a cause of action under federal law unless the allegation was clearly immaterial, or the claim was made solely for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Plante asserts claims under the [Medicare Act], which is a federal statute”
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.