green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
10.3 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1982 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1982
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Fineman v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.
market share below 50 is rarely evidence of monopoly power, a share between 50 and 70 can occasionally show monopoly power, and a share above 70 is usually strong evidence of monopoly power.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Van Orman v. American Insurance
this requirement is applicable only after plan assets have been used to satisfy plan liabilities
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Francis Van Orman, on His Own Behalf and on Behalf of a Class of All Participants, Continuing Former Employees, Pensioners, Beneficiaries and Contingent Survivors, as Such Persons Are Defined in the Revised Retirement Plan of the American Insurance Company, American Automobile Insurance Company and Associated Indemnity Corporation (\Tarp\") v. The American Insurance Company
this (distribution) requirement is applicable only after plan assets have been used to satisfy plan liabilities
cited
Cited "see"
Emmenegger v. Bull Moose Tube Co.
See id. at 1331 (citing Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1219 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981)).
cited
Cited "see"
Scarso v. Briks
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1219-20 (8th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd. v. British Airways PLC
See Broadway Delivery Corp. v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 651 F.2d 122, 129 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981); United States v. Aluminum Co. of America, 148 F.2d 416, 424 (2d Cir.1945).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Eastman Kodak Co.
See Broadway Delivery Corp. v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 651 F.2d 122, 128 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981) (It may even be possible to determine that a defendant lacks monopoly power as a matter of law “if the defendant’s share is less than 50 percent, or even somewhat above that figure, and the record contains no significant evidence concerning the market structure to show that the defendant’s share of the market gives it monopoly power.”) (emphasis supplied); see also United States v. Aluminum Company of America, 148 F.2d 416, 424 (2d …
discussed
Cited "see"
Haberern v. KAUPP VASCULAR SURGEONS BEN. PLAN
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981); Kay v. Thrift and Profit Sharing Plan, 780 F.Supp. 1447, 1462 (E.D.Pa.1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
Robert E. Quesinberry, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Karen S. Quesinberry, Deceased v. Life Insurance Company of North America, and Citibank Individual Banking Group Accident Plan, Robert E. Quesinberry, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Karen S. Quesinberry, Deceased v. Life Insurance Company of North America, and Citibank Individual Banking Group Accident Plan
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1219 (8th Cir.) (award of pre-judgment interest in ERISA cases within district court's discretion), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 and cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1084 , 102 S.Ct. 641 , 70 L.Ed.2d 619 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Quesinberry v. Life Insurance Co. of North America
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1219 (8th Cir.) (award of pre-judgment interest in ERISA cases within district court’s discretion), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 and cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1084 , 102 S.Ct. 641 , 70 L.Ed.2d 619 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Williams v. Wright
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.1981), ce rt. denied 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Life Insurance Co. of North America v. Hunter
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 496 F.Supp. 215 (E.D.Mo.1980), aff'd, 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Consolidated Beef Industries, Inc. v. New York Life Insurance
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 , 454 U.S. 1084 , 102 S.Ct. 641 , 70 L.Ed.2d 619 (1981) (Dependahl).
cited
Cited "see"
Consolidated Beef Industries, Inc. v. New York Life Insurance Company
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 , 454 U.S. 1084 , 102 S.Ct. 641 , 70 L.Ed.2d 619 (1981) (Dependahl ).
discussed
Cited "see"
R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co. v. Judy Prevost Gerald Kolinsky, Compensation Commissioner, Eighth District, State of Connecticut John A. Arcudi, Chairman, Board of Compensation Commissioners, State of Connecticut Clarine Nardi Riddle, Attorney General, State of Connecticut, United Automobile, Agricultural Implement and Aerospace Workers, Afl-Cio and District 91, International Association of MacHinists and Aerospace Workers, Afl-Cio, Amici Curiae. O & G Industries, Inc. v. John Arcudi, Edward F. Bradley, Gerald Kolinsky, Gregory Gorman and Sharon Ferrillo Petrushonis
Co. v. Corcoran, 715 F.2d 784, 786 (2d Cir.1983); see Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1215 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981). "[T]he express pre-emption provisions of ERISA are deliberately expansive, and designed to 'establish pension plan regulation as exclusively a federal concern.' " Pilot Life Ins.
discussed
Cited "see"
R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co. v. Prevost
Co. v. Corcoran, 715 F.2d 784, 786 (2d Cir.1983); see Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1215 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981). “[T]he express pre-emption provisions of ERISA are deliberately expansive, and designed to ‘establish pension plan regulation as exclusively a federal concern.’ ” Pilot Life Ins.
discussed
Cited "see"
Allison v. Dugan
See Brink v. DaLesio, 667 F.2d 420 (4th Cir.1981) (error not to allow prejudgment interest in an action to recover for breach of trust), and Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1219 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 1084, 102 S.Ct. 512 , 641, 70 L.Ed.2d 384 , 619 (1981) (construing 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (a)(3)(B), prejudgment interest is part of remedial relief to be awarded in an action to recover benefits). “[W]here a statute expressly provides a particular remedy or remedies, a court *1049 must be chary of leading others into it.” Id. (quoting Transamerica Mortgage Ad…
cited
Cited "see"
Melford W. Gunderson v. W.R. Grace & Co. Long Term Disability Income Plan
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corporation, 496 F.Supp. 215 (E.D.Mo.1980), aff'd, 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
U.S. Philips Corp. And North American Philips Corp. v. Windmere Corporation, Izumi Seimitsu Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha
(2×)
Accord Broadway Delivery Corp. v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 651 F.2d 122, 131 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981) (motion to dismiss after jury trial granted because plaintiffs proof “did not permit a reasonable fact-finder [to make] a careful assessment of the relationship between the defendants’ prices and costs”); MCI Communications Corp. v. American Tel. & Tel.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Football League v. National Football League
See Broadway Delivery Corp. v. United Parcel Serv. of Am., Inc., 651 F.2d 122, 130 (2d Cir.) (“when such a traditional form of proof [as market share data] is lacking, the plaintiff must produce unambiguous evidence that the defendant has the power to control prices or exclude competition”), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Football League v. National Football League
See Broadway Delivery Corp. v. United Parcel Serv. of Am., Inc., 651 F.2d 122, 130 (2d Cir.) ("when such a traditional form of proof [as market share data] is lacking, the plaintiff must produce unambiguous evidence that the defendant has the power to control prices or exclude competition"), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
United Air Lines, Inc. v. Austin Travel Corp.
See Broadway Delivery Corp. v. United Parcel Service of America, 651 F.2d 122, 129 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981); Nifty Foods Corp. v. *183 Great Atlantic & Pac.
cited
Cited "see"
Morningstar v. Meijer, Inc.
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Devine v. Xerox Corp.
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., *358 653 F.2d 1208, 1219 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Alaska State Council of Carpenters v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 1281
(2×)
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981). 1 Here, “state law” does “relate to” the employee benefit plans, given that Congress used the words “relate to” in 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (a) in their “broad sense.” Shaw v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 463 U.S. 85, 97 , 103 S.Ct. 2890, 2900 , 77 L.Ed.2d 490, 501 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dumac Forestry Services, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1215-16 (8th Cir.) (finding that Congress intended to provide uniform remedies in enacting ERISA), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Foltz v. U.S. News & World Report, Inc.
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Co., 653 F.2d 1208 , 1216 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981). 54 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Barbara G. Hollenbeck, Administratrix of the Estate of Virginia M. Gutting, Deceased v. Falstaff Brewing Corporation, Barbara G. Hollenbeck, Administratrix of the Estate of Virginia M. Gutting, Deceased v. Falstaff Brewing Corporation
Hollenbeck v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 605 F.Supp. 421, 435 (E.D.Mo.1984); see Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1216 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 and 1084, 102 S.Ct. 512 and 641, 70 L.Ed.2d 384 and 619 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hollenbeck v. Falstaff Brewing Corp.
Hollenbeck v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 605 F.Supp. 421, 435 (E.D.Mo.1984); see Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1216 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 and 1084, 102 S.Ct. 512 and 641, 70 L.Ed.2d 384 and 619 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Light v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Alabama, Inc.
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.1981) cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981). 2 .
cited
Cited "see"
Blau v. Del Monte Corporation
Accord, Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 491 F.Supp. 1188, 1195 (E.D.Mo.1980), aff'd 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Devex Corporation v. General Motors Corporation
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Co., 653 F.2d 1208 , 1219 (8th Cir.), cert. denied 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981); Carpa v. Ward Foods, Inc., 567 F.2d 1316, 1321 (5th Cir.1978), overruled on other grounds, Copper Liquor v. Adolph Coors Brewing Co., 701 F.2d 542 (5th Cir. in banc 1983); Perkins v. Standard Oil of California, 487 F.2d 672, 675 (9th Cir.1973).
cited
Cited "see"
Blau v. Del Monte Corp.
Accord, Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 491 F.Supp. 1188, 1195 (E.D.Mo.1980), aff'd 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Devex Corp. v. General Motors Corp.
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Co., 653 F.2d 1208 , 1219 (8th Cir.), cert. denied 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981); Carpa v. Ward Foods, Inc., 567 F.2d 1316, 1321 (5th Cir.1978), overruled on other grounds, Copper Liquor v. Adolph Coors Brewing Co., 701 F.2d 542 (5th Cir. in banc 1983); Perkins v. Standard Oil of California, 487 F.2d 672, 675 (9th Cir.1973).
cited
Cited "see"
Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.
See generally Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1214-16 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Davidson v. Cook
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 496 F.Supp. 215, 217 (E.D.Mo.1980), aff ’d, 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 1084, 102 S.Ct. 512 , 641, 70 L.Ed.2d 384 , 619 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cowden v. Montgomery County Society for Cancer Control
See, Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 , 1216-17 (8th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981); Maxfield v. Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Health, Welfare & Pension Funds, 559 F.Supp. 158, 160 (N.D.Ill.1982); Diano v. Central States, 551 F.Supp. 861, 863 (N.D.Ohio 1982); Calhoun v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 478 F.Supp. 357, 359 (E.D.Mo.1979); Horn v. Retirement Fund Trust, 424 F.Supp. 80, 82 (C.D.Calif.1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
Brown v. Retirement Committee of Briggs & Stratton Retirement Plan
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Co., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981) (ERISA preempts state law cause of action for tortious interference with contract insofar as it relates to pension benefit plans).
cited
Cited "see"
Virginia M. Gutting v. Falstaff Brewing Corporation, a Delaware Corporation
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208, 1213-14 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 1084, 102 S.Ct. 512 , 641, 70 L.Ed.2d 384 , 619 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Leonard Thornton and William Carothers, Etc. v. James E. Evans
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981). 45 .
discussed
Cited "see"
American Timber & Trading Co. v. First National Bank
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 , 1219 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981); Clinchfield Coal Co. v. Cox, 611 F.2d 47, 48-49 (4th Cir. 1979); Payne v. Panama Canal, 607 F.2d 155, 166 (5th Cir. 1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
American Timber & Trading Co. v. First National Bank Of Oregon
See Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 , 1219 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981); Clinchfield Coal Co. v. Cox, 611 F.2d 47, 48-49 (4th Cir. 1979); Payne v. Panama Canal, 607 F.2d 155, 166 (5th Cir. 1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
New Mexico Oncology & Hematology Consultants, Ltd. v. Presbyterian Healthcare Services
See also Reazin, 899 F.2d at 967 (comparing Valley Liquors, Inc. v. Renfield Importers, Ltd., 822 F.2d 656, 667 (7th Cir.) ("Without a showing of special market conditions or other compelling evidence of market power, the lowest possible market share legally sufficient to sustain a finding of monopolization is between 17% and 25%.”), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 977 , 108 S.Ct 488 , 98 L.Ed.2d 486 (1987), and Dimmitt Agri Indus., Inc. v. CPC Int’l Inc., 679 F.2d 516, 529 (5th Cir.1982) ("market shares in the range of 16 to 25 percent, such as those held by [defendant] are insufficient-at least a…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
K.M.B. Warehouse Distributors, Inc. v. Walker Manufacturing Co.
Market power has been defined as “the ability to raise price significantly above the competitive level without losing all of one’s business.” Graphic Prods., 717 F.2d at 1570 ; see also Broadway Delivery Corp. v. United Parcel Serv., 651 F.2d 122, 126-27 (2d Cir.) (defining the market power as “the power to control prices or exclude competition” in the context of a monopolization claim under § 2 of the Sherman Act), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
K.M.B. Warehouse Distributors, Inc. v. Walker Manufacturing Company
Capital Imaging, 996 F.2d at 546 . 19 Market power has been defined as "the ability to raise price significantly above the competitive level without losing all of one's business." Graphic Prods., 717 F.2d at 1570 ; see also Broadway Delivery Corp. v. United Parcel Serv., 651 F.2d 122, 126-27 (2d Cir.) (defining the market power as "the power to control prices or exclude competition" in the context of a monopolization claim under Sec. 2 of the Sherman Act), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
International Audiotext Network, Inc. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
See also Broadway Delivery Corp. v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 651 F.2d 122, 126-27 (2d Cir.) (“[T]he power to control prices or exclude competition ... in the relevant market.” (citations omitted)), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Richards v. Union Labor Life Insurance
See also Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Cefali v. Buffalo Brass Co., Inc.
See, e.g., Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir.1981), cert. den. 454 U.S. 968 , 102 S.Ct. 512 , 70 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Walter L. Reazin, M.D. Hca Health Services of Kansas, Inc., D/B/A Wesley Medical Center Health Care Plus, Inc. And New Century Life Insurance Co. v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas, Inc., and Counterclaim and Hmo Kansas, Inc., Additional Counterclaim v. Hospital Corporation of America, Additional Counterclaim
Compare Valley Liquors, Inc. v. Renfield Importers, Ltd., 822 F.2d 656, 667 (7th Cir.) ("Without a showing of special market conditions or other compelling evidence of market power, the lowest possible market share legally sufficient to sustain a finding of monopolization is between 17% and 25%."), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 977 , 108 S.Ct. 488 , 98 L.Ed.2d 486 (1987), and Dimmitt Agri Indus., Inc. v. CPC Int'l, Inc., 679 F.2d 516, 529 (5th Cir.1982) ("market shares in the range of 16 to 25 percent, such as those held by [defendant] are insufficient--at least absent other compelling structural evi…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Bushelman
v.
California
v.
California
No. 81-429.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 2, 1981.
Published
Citer courts: D. New Jersey (1)
Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.