De Nobel’s Empirical Analysis
885 F.2d 1180 · 1989
Citation profile
100 federal appellate · 37 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 273 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably Brown v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Alabama, Inc. (1990), Wildbur v. Arco Chemical Co. (1992)
100 federal appellate · 37 district · 2 state decisions
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 26 U.S.C. § 411 (§ 1012 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 28 U.S.C. § 2106 · 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. § 1053 (§ 203 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1054 (§ 204 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1102 (§ 402 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1104 (§ 404 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Firestone Tire and Rubber Company v. Bruch · Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · Bowman Transportation, Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. · Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. Russell · Alessi v. Raybestos-Manhattan, 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 273 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“whether the challenged interpretation is at odds with the procedural and substantive requirements of ERISA itself.”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the 'power to construe disputed or doubtful terms' or to resolve disputes over benefits eligibility.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he dispositive principle ... that where plan fiduciaries have offered a reasonable interpretation of [a] disputed provision[ ], courts may not replace [it] with an interpretation of their own--and therefore cannot disturb as an abuse of discretion the challenged benefits determination.”
8 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.