Cunningham v. Cornell University’s Empirical Analysis
2023
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 80A · 26 U.S.C. § 403 · 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) · 29 U.S.C. § 1104 (§ 404 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1106 (§ 406 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1108 (§ 408 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1109 (§ 409 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc.
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“it is incumbent on the court 18 1 to address each theory on its own merit, separating out as necessary the allegations 2 underlying the various claims.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Henry v. Oluwole
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.