Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 901 F.2d 1514 - Centric Corporation Trustees of Centennial State Carpenters Pension Trust Fund v. Centric Corporation US Centric Corporation

Centric Corporation Trustees of Centennial State Carpenters Pension Trust Fund v. Centric Corporation US Centric Corporation’s Empirical Analysis

901 F.2d 1514 · 1990

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
June 2024
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2024 · most notably Pioneer Investment Services Company v. Brunswick Associates Limited Partnership (1993), City of Chanute Kansas v. Williams Natural Gas Company (1994)

8 federal appellate · 3 district ·

2301990200020102020decided

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. § 1398 (§ 4218 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1399 (§ 4219 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1401 (§ 4221 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1451 (§ 4301 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)

Relies on S.S. Zoe Colocotroni v. Puerto Rico · Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. RA Gray & Co. · Democratic Party of the United States v. Wisconsin ex rel. La Follette · Smith v. Ford Motor Co. · Gull Airborne Instruments, Inc. v. Weinberger

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

  1. “(1) whether granting the delay will prejudice the debtor; (2) the length of the delay and its impact on efficient court administration; (3) whether the delay was beyond the reasonable control of the person whose duty it was to perform; (4) whether the creditor acted in good faith; and (5) whether clients should be penalized for their counsel’s mistake or neglect.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'(1) inexcusable delay in instituting a suit; and (2) resulting prejudice to defendant from such delay.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a failure to arbitrate does not waive a defense that the employer does not yet have,”
    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.