Rosen v. TRW, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
979 F.2d 191 · 1992
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Caribbean Broadcasting System, Ltd. v. Cable & Wireless PLC (1998), Lee v. Burkhart (1993)
27 federal appellate · 5 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 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Foman v. Davis · Bank v. Pitt · Donald Law v. Ernst & Young, Etc. · Rhodes v. Amarillo Hospital District
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“if a company is administrating the plan, then it can be held liable for ERISA violations, regardless of the provisions of the plan document.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“leave shall be freely given when justice so requires,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In the absence of any apparent or declared reason — such as undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, futility of amendment, etc. — the leave sought should, as the rules require, be “freely given.””
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.