Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 737 F.2d 1274 - United States ex rel. Reilly v. New England Teamsters & Trucking Industry Pension Fund

United States ex rel. Reilly v. New England Teamsters & Trucking Industry Pension Fund’s Empirical Analysis

737 F.2d 1274 · 1984

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
July 2013
most recently cited

8 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently July 2013 · most notably Saadeh v. Farouki (1997), Sinicropi v. Milone (1990)

8 federal appellate ·

1201984199020002010decided

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 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 38 U.S.C. § 2021 · 38 U.S.C. § 2022

Relies on Fishgold v. Sullivan Drydock & Repair Corp. · Central Intelligence Agency v. Holy Spirit Ass'n for the Unification of World Christianity · Rachal v. United States · Forster v. United States · McKinney v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad

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

  1. “Any employee not covered by subsection (c) of this section who [is employed by a private employer] shall upon request be granted a leave of absence by such person’s employer for the period required to perform active duty for training ... in the Armed Forces of the United States. Upon such employee’s release from a period of such active duty for training ..., such employee shall be permitted to return to such employee’s position with such seniority, status, pay, and vacation as such employee would have had if such employee had not been absent for such purposes.”
    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.