Vorpahl Ht Je’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 21 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2017 · most notably Forbau Ex Rel. Miller v. Aetna Life Insurance Co. (1994), Kamen v. Nordberg (1988)
5 federal appellate · 21 district · 6 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
Relies on Beacon Theaters Inc v. C Westover · Dairy Queen, Inc. v. Wood · Curtis v. Loether · Ross v. Bernhard · United Mine Workers, Local No. 1854 v. National Labor Relations Board
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that Congress’ silence ... reflects an intention that suits for pension benefits by disappointed applicants are equitable. Such suits under the law of trusts have existed for quite a while in state courts ... [and] have been considered equitable in character____ Thus the most reasonable interpretation is that Congress intended to provide general federal jurisdiction over these equitable suits that had traditionally been brought in state courts.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“such a limited scope of review “bespeaks a legislative scheme granting initial discretionary decisionmaking to bodies other than the federal courts, with which federal jury trials have proved incompatible” Wardle v. Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund, 627 F.2d at 830 . The court viewed this incompatibility as further evidence of the lack of any implied congressional intent to grant a right to a jury trial. We concur in this determination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The mere fact that petitioners pray for monetary relief in part does not mandate that this action be characterized as legal rather than equitable. See Curtis v. Loether, 415 U.S. 189, 196 [ 94 S.Ct. 1005, 1009 , 39 L.Ed.2d 260 ] (1974). Rather, because any monetary relief turns on a determination of entitlement to benefits, we consider such relief to be an integral part of an equitable action.”
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.