Sulyma v. Intel Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
909 F.3d 1069 · 2018
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 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. § 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. § 1113 (§ 413 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on LOCKHEED CORP. Et Al. v. SPINK · Fink v. National Savings & Trust Co. · Blanton v. Anzalone · 135 S. Ct. 1823 - Tibble v. Edison Int'l · Waller v. Blue Cross
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the earliest date on which the plaintiff had actual knowledge of the breach or violation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“knowledge that is actual, not merely a possible inference from ambiguous circumstances.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the date of the last action which constituted a part of the breach or violation”
2 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.