No. 85-1336’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently June 2010 · most notably Chateaugay Corporation v. E Shalala D Os, Upshur Coals Corporation v. United Mine Workers Of America (1991)
1 federal appellate · 2 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
Relies on John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston · Eisenstadt v. Baker · United States v. Monton · International Union United Automobile Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America Uaw v. Yard-Man Incorporated · Bower v. Bunker Hill Co.
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“obligation to provide health benefits ... to its retired ... coal miners under the 1978 and 1981 Wage Agreements does not extend beyond the expiration of those Agreements.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“benefits for ... Employees ... as well as pensioners ... shall be guaranteed during the term of this Agreement”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although this obligation existed only for the life of the 1978 contract, which expired in 1981, it was perpetuated in the 1981 and 1984 contracts. Superficially, it might appear that none of the defendants is liable for the retirees’ benefits. Because Allied had withdrawn from the coal business in 1980 it was not a signatory to the 1981 contract. Armco and Shannon Pocahontas, on the other hand, although signatories to the 1978 and 1981 contracts, agreed with Allied when they individually acquired the two mines in 1980 that they would not assume the obligations to pay benefits to Allied’s retirees. In creating the 1974 Benefit Trust, the union and the coal operators anticipated a successor scenario and agreed that, under such circumstances, the 1974 Benefit Trust could not assume responsibility for payment of the benefits. If that were the complete picture, the answer to this dispute simply would be that after expiration of the 1978 agreement on March 27, 1981, no one had a duty to provide the retired miners with the disputed benefits.”
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.