Connors v. Calvert Development Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 10 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently June 2014 · most notably IUE v. Barker & Williamson Inc (1986), Teamsters Pension Trust Fund-Board of Trustees of the Western Conference v. Allyn Transportation Co., Board of Trustees of the Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Trust Fund, Plaintiff/counterdefendants/appellees v. Landy Corporation, and Landy Leasing, Inc., a Nevada Corporation, Defendant/counterclaimant/appellant. Board of Trustees of the Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Trust Fund, Plaintiff/counterdefendants/appellees v. Landy Corporation, and Energy Carriers, Inc., Defendant/counterclaimant/appellant. Board of Trustees of the Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Trust Fund, Plaintiff/counterdefendants/appellees v. Landy Corporation, Defendant/counterclaimant/appellant, and Energy Carriers and Landy Leasing, Inc. (1987)
6 federal appellate · 10 district ·
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 26 U.S.C. § 414 (§ 1015 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (§ 2 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 Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. Ouimet Corp. · Van Ekris v. S.S. Rio Paraguay · 550 F. Supp. 35 - Trustees of Retirement Fund of Fur Manufacturing Industry v. Lazar-Wisotzky, Inc. · 537 F. Supp. 1048 - Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. Anthony Co. · 603 F. Supp. 1088 - Thomas v. Southland Corp.
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[U]nder ERISA there is a unity of interest in the case of a controlled group of corporations, since the entire group is considered to be a single employer for withdrawal liability and other purposes. Therefore, PBGC believes that a notice of default sent to the contributing entity which is a member of a controlled group of corporations, within the meaning of Section 4001(b)(1) [ 29 U.S.C. § 1301 (b)(1)], constitutes constructive notice to the other members of the same controlled group. Thus, PBGC finds that Section 4219(c)(5)(A) [ 29 U.S.C. § 1399 (c)(5)(A)] does not require notice to the other members of a controlled group.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Payments shall be made by an employer in accordance with the determinations made under this part [ 29 U.S.C. §§ 1381 et seq.] until the arbitrator issues a final decision with respect to the determination submitted for arbitration, with any necessary adjustments in subsequent payments for overpayments or underpayments arising out of the decision of the arbitrator with respect to the determination.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In order to collect withdrawal liability, a plan must notify an employer of the amount of withdrawal liability, supply the employer with a schedule of payments, and demand payment. Section 1399(b)(1). Once the demand is made, the employer is to begin paying withdrawal liability. Although any dispute concerning the amount of withdrawal liability does not obviate the obligation to make interim payments, the language of Section 1399 is clear that no such obligation exists until sixty days after demand for payment. Section 1399(c)(2).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Connors v. Mulvehill
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.