Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 719 F.2d 760 - Powers v. South Central United Food & Commercial Workers Unions & Employers Health & Welfare Trust

Powers v. South Central United Food & Commercial Workers Unions & Employers Health & Welfare Trust’s Empirical Analysis

719 F.2d 760 · 1983

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2014 · most notably Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Taylor (1987), Willy v. Coastal Corp. (1988)

29 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

4801983199020002010decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 717 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1337 · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1446 · 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (§ 2 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)

Relies on Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Gully v. First Nat. Bank in Meridian · Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie · Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co. · Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets

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

  1. “[WJhether a case is one arising under the Constitution or a law or treaty of the United States, in the sense of the jurisdictional statute ... must be determined from what necessarily appears in the plaintiffs statement of his own claim in the bill or declaration, unaided by anything alleged in anticipation or avoidance of defenses which it is thought the defendant may interpose.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““(a) ... any civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or the defendants, to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending.” 4”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “an asserted or anticipated defense predicated on federal preemption of state law is, in jurisdictional terms, a defense like any other and will not serve to invoke federal jurisdiction”
    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.