Smith v. Dunham-Bush, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
959 F.2d 6 · 1992
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 21 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 137 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Vartanian v. Monsanto Co. (1994), Dukes v. U.S. Healthcare, Inc. (1995)
32 federal appellate · 21 district · 5 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 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 29 U.S.C. § 1102 (§ 402 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (§ 514 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · Pilot Life Insurance v. Dedeaux · Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams · Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Taylor
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 137 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he existence of [the employer’s] pension plan would be a critical factor in establishing the extent of liability under state common law. In reality [plaintiffs] suit represents an attempt to supplement the plan’s express provisions and secure an additional benefit. Smith’s cause of action therefore relates not merely to his benefits, but to the essence of the plan itself.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) Persons empowered to bring a civil action. A civil action may be brought (1) by a participant or beneficiary (A) for relief provided for in subsection (C) of this section, or (B) to recover benefits due to him under the terms of this plan, to enforce his rights under the terms of the plan, or to clarify his rights to future benefits under the terms of the plan; (2) by Secretary, or by a participant, beneficiary or fiduciary for appropriate relief under section 1109 of this title; (3) by the Secretary, or by a participant, beneficiary or fiduciary (A) to enjoin any act or practice which violates any provision of this subchapter or the terms of the plan, or (B) to obtain other appropriate equitable relief (i) to redress such violations or (ii) to enforce any provisions of this subchapter or the terms of the plan.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The term "State” includes a State, any political subdivisions thereof, or any agency or instrumentality of either, which purports to regulate, directly or indirectly, the terms and conditions of employee benefit plans covered by this subchapter.”
3 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.