Deeming v. American Standard, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
905 F.2d 1124 · 1990
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 10 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently January 2014 · most notably Rush v. McDonald's Corp. (1992), Jim L. Woolsey v. Marion Laboratories, Inc. Marion Laboratories, Inc., Profit Sharing Plan (1991)
41 federal appellate · 10 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 411 (§ 1012 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1140 (§ 510 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1343 (§ 4043 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Morgan v. United States · Robnett v. United States · Lojek v. Thomas · Kross v. Western Electric Co. · Sanchez v. Miller
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“discharge, fine, suspend, expel, discipline or discriminate against a participant or beneficiary for exercising any right to which he is entitled under the provisions of an employee benefit plan,”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a fundamental prerequisite to a § 510 action is an allegation that the employer-employee relationship, and not merely the pension plan, was changed in some discriminatory or wrongful way.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“§ 510 was designed to protect the 'employment relationship,' not the integrity of specific plans.”
4 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.