Dugan v. Nickla’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (§ 514 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Firestone Tire and Rubber Company v. Bruch · Pilot Life Insurance v. Dedeaux · Illinois v. City of Milwaukee
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Generally, under the American Rule, a person bears the expenses of his own case. However, in this case, the defendant's settlement benefits the Fund. Had defendant not engaged an attorney and pursued her claims in state court, the Fund would not have recovered any of the benefits paid concerning defendant's injuries. Since the Fund benefits from defendant's pursuit of her claims, a one-third reduction of the Fund's subrogation amount of the settlement fairly apportions the attorney's fees.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Upon any recovery ... from any person ... insurance company, whether by suit, judgment, settlement, compromise, or otherwise, the Trustees ... shall be entitled to immediate reimbursement to the extent of benefits paid ... The Trustees shall be first reimbursed fully by such Employee, ... to the extent of benefits paid ... from the monies paid by any person ... and the balance of monies, if any, then remaining from such recovery shall be retained by the Employee ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“In this case ... defendant’s verdict benefits the [Plan]. Had defendant not engaged an attorney and pursued his case, the [Plan] would not have recovered any of the benefits paid concerning defendant’s [injuries]. Since the [Plan] benefits from defendant’s pursuit of his case, one-third reduction of the [Plan’s] share of the verdict fairly apportions the attorney’s fee.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. PRC, Inc. v. O'Bryan
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.