Culver v. Ace Electric’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably Specialty Restaurants Corp. v. Nelson (2010), Colorado Department of Labor & Employment v. Esser (2001)
27 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 42 U.S.C. § 402 (§ 202 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 403 (§ 203 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 415 (§ 215 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 416 (§ 216 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia · United States Railroad Retirement Board v. Fritz · Richardson v. Belcher · People v. District Court, Second Judicial District · 120 Wash. 2d 461 - Harris v. Department of Labor & Industries
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is the intent of the general assembly that the "Workers' Compensation Act of Colorado" be interpreted so as to assure the quick and efficient delivery of disability and medical benefits to injured workers at a reasonable cost to employers, without the necessity of any litigation, recognizing that the workers' compensation system in Colorado is based on a mutual renunciation of common law rights and defenses by employers and employees alike.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“maintaining the fiscal integrity of the workers' compensation system; allocating the fiscal burden equitably among funding sources, and controlling costs to employers while providing legislatively-intended benefits to injured workers”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“requires that social security retirement benefits be offset against the injured employee's workers' compensation benefits, despite the fact that retirement benefits are not designed to compensate a claimant for an industrial injury.”
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.