green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
8.1 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“a person may hold a ‘contingent’ claim and thereby be a ‘creditor’ within the meaning of the Bankruptcy Act”
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 39 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Sullivan v. Combustion Engineering
See Howell v. Celotex Corp., 904 F. 2d 3 , 5 (3d Cir.1990); Herber v. Johns-Manville Corp., 785 F. 2d 79 , 88-89 (3d Cir.1986); Giovanetti v. Johns-Manville Corp., 372 Pa.Super. 431 , 539 A. 2d 871, 876 (Pa.Super. 1988); but see In re Hawaii Federal Asbestos Cases, 734 F. Supp. 1563, 1567-68 (D.Hawaii 1990). *141 In our view, Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp. (Conrail), 758 F. 2d 936 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed. 2d 152 (1985), and Burns v. Jaquays Min.
discussed
Cited "but see"
In Re UNR Industries, Inc.
But see, Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936 (3rd Cir.1985) cert. denied — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 , (1985) where it was decided under Section 77 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C. § 205 (Repealed) and under the Federal Employee Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51 et seq., that a plaintiff who had been exposed to asbestos prior to confirmation, but who had not manifested any asbestos-related diseases until after confirmation, did not have a recognizable claim under the Bankruptcy Act, which was discharged upon the confirmation of the plan. 13 .
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Miller v. Steinberg (In Re Marilyn Steinberg Enterprises Inc.)
a person may hold a 'contingent' claim and thereby be a 'creditor' within the meaning of the bankruptcy act
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Holcomb v. Pilot Life Insurance
once established, erisa operates to protect an employee's interest in the welfare benefit program regardless of whether the employer complies with the administrative and reporting requirements detailed under erisa.
discussed
Cited "see"
AlliedSignal, Inc. v. Ott
See Burns v. Jaquays Mining Corp., 156 Ariz. 375 , 752 P.2d 28, 30 (Ct.App.1987) (citing Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936, 942 (3d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985)) ("[SJubclinical injury resulting from exposure to asbestos is insufficient to constitute the actual loss or damage to a plaintiff's interest required to sustain a cause of action under generally applicable principles of tort law."); Bernier v. Raymark Indus., Inc., 516 A.2d 534, 542 (Me.1986) ("[IInhalation alone is insufficient to give rise to [a judicially recognizabl…
discussed
Cited "see"
Fergus v. Standard Insurance
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1353-54 (9th Cir.1984) (procedural violations were one factor in determining that a denial of benefits was arbitrary and capricious for a secret separation policy that had no summary plan description, no claims procedure, and no provision to inform participants in writing of anything), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bollman Hat Company v. Kevin T. Root Dale E. Anstine, P.C. Bollman Hat Company, as Sponsor of the Bollman Hat Company Health and Welfare Benefits Plan
(2×)
See Hamilton v. Air Jamaica, Ltd., 945 F.2d 74, 78 (3d Cir.1991) (Courts have "no authority to draft the substantive content in [ERISA] plans.") (quoting Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1353 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985)), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 938 , 112 S.Ct. 1479 , 117 L.Ed.2d 622 (1992); Van Orman v. American Ins.
cited
Cited "see"
Michael Buckley v. Metro-North Commuter Railroad
See Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936, 942 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985); Amendola v. Kansas City So.
cited
Cited "see"
In the Matter of Penn Central Transportation Company, Usx Corporation and Bessemer and Lake Erie Railroad Company
See Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936, 941 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. *1115 864, 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985); In re M.
cited
Cited "see"
IN RE: Penn Central Trans. Co.
See Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936 , 941 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S. Ct. 183 (1985); In re M.
discussed
Cited "see"
Murphy v. Keystone Steel & Wire Co.
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1353 (9th Cir.), cert, denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985) (active concealment); Govoni v. Bricklayers, Masons & Plasterers, 732 F.2d 250, 252 (1st Cir.1984) (collecting cases requiring reliance and prejudice).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re United Merchants & Manufacturers, Inc.
See Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936, 942-44 (3d Cir.), cert. denied 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985) (rejecting rule that exposure to asbestos creates right to payment for F.E.L.A. tort cause of action).
discussed
Cited "see"
Jane v. Lewandowski v. Occidental Chemical Corporation
See Simmons v. Diamond Shamrock Corp., 844 F.2d 517, 524-25 (8th Cir.1988) (following Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1354 (9th Cir.1984) (stating general rule against substantive remedy for procedural violations, with exception for violations so egregious that they work a substantive harm), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985)).
cited
Cited "see"
Brumm v. Bert Bell N.F.L. Retirement Plan
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1353 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Rucker v. Pacific FM, Inc.
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1352 (9th Cir.1984), cert, denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kreutzer v. Smith Corporation
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1353 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985) (active concealment); Govoni v. Bricklayers, Masons & Plasterers, 732 F.2d 250, 252 (1st Cir.1984) (collecting cases requiring reliance and prejudice). 24 In Wolfe, the employer denied an employee's claim for disability benefits, but failed to state the reasons for the denial.
discussed
Cited "see"
Christie v. K-Mart Corp. Employees Retirement Pension Plan
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1353 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985) (active concealment); Govoni v. Bricklayers, Masons & Plasterers, 732 F.2d 250, 252 (1st Cir.1984 (collecting cases requiring reliance and prejudice).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kreutzer v. A.O. Smith Corp.
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1353 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985) (active concealment); Govoni v. Bricklayers, Masons & Plasterers, 732 F.2d 250, 252 (1st Cir.1984) (collecting cases requiring reliance and prejudice).
discussed
Cited "see"
Carpenters District Council v. Dillard Department Stores, Inc.
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1352 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985); Adams v. Avondale Industries, Inc., 905 F.2d 943, 947 (6th Cir.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 111 S.Ct. 517 , 112 L.Ed.2d 529 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
George Farias v. Bexar County Board of Trustees for Mental Health Mental Retardation Services
(2×)
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1357 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985). .The district court actually permitted the defendants to file five separate motions to dismiss or for summary judgment in addition to the First Amended Answer.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Chateaugay Corp. (In Re Chateaugay Corp.)
See Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936 , 942 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985); In re Mooney Aircraft, Inc., 730 F.2d 367 , 375 & n. 6 (5th Cir. 1984); In re Gladding Corp., 20 B.R. 566, 568 (Bankr.D.Mass.1982).
cited
Cited "see"
Lipscomb v. Simmons
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1352 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Lipscomb ex rel. DeFehr v. Simmons
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348 , 1352 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
UNC Teton Exploration Drilling, Inc. v. Peyton
(2×)
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dodd v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985); Scott v. Gulf Oil Corp., 754 F.2d 1499 (9th Cir.1985); Credit Managers Ass’n v. Kennesaw Life & Acc. Ins., 809 F.2d 617 (9th Cir.1987). 3 .
examined
Cited "see"
Henne v. Allis-Chalmers Corp.
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Blau v. Del Monte Corporation, 748 F.2d 1348 , 1355 (9th Cir.) (declining to defer to “secret purpose” of plan), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ayers v. Township of Jackson
(2×)
See Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F. 2d 936, 942 (3rd Cir.1985) ("[S]ubclinical injury resulting from exposure to asbestos is insufficient to constitute the actual loss or damage to a plaintiff's interest required to sustain a cause of action * * *."), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed. 2d 152 (1985); Laswell v. Brown, 683 F. 2d 261, 269 (8th Cir.1982) (alleged latent cellular or genetic defects associated with nuclear testing; "[A] lawsuit for personal injuries cannot be based upon the mere possibility of some future harm."), cert. *595 denied, 459 U.S. 1210 , 1…
cited
Cited "see"
Ogden v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.
See Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348 (9th Cir.1984) amended, 6 E.B.C. 1264, cert. denied, — U.S.-, 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Behunin v. Dow Chemical Co.
See Schweitzer v. Conrail, 758 F.2d 936, 944 (3rd Cir.1985), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985) (railroad workers’ "future F.E.L.A. causes of action were not dischargeable claims under section 77” of the former bankruptcy act); P.F.
discussed
Cited "see"
DeAngelis v. Warner Lambert Co.
Mallory & Co., Inc., 712 F.2d 1209, 1212-1213 (7th Cir.1983); see also Denton v. First National Bank of Waco, Texas, 765 F.2d 1295, 1304 (5th Cir.1985) (under ERISA “arbitrary or capricious” standard court should consider internal consistency of plan under administrator’s interpretation); Miles, 698 F.2d at 599 (interpretation which renders certain plan provisions superfluous may be arbitrary or capricious); (2) whether the challenged interpretation has been uniformly applied in similar situations; see Blakeman v. Mead Containers, 779 F.2d 1146, 1151 (6th Cir.1985); Anderson v. Ciba-Geig…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Nunez v. Monterey Peninsula Engineering
Compare, Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1353-54 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
37 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 783, prod.liab.rep.(cch)p. 13,542 William Dunn Hess Oil Virgin Islands Corp. v. Hovic Amerada Hess Corp. Keene Corporation v. The Litwin Corporation Litwin Panamerican Borinquen Insulation Co. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation
In granting summary judgment for the defendants, the district court held that under Virgin Islands law, "a tort claim will not lie in the absence of a demonstrable injury [and] mere exposure to asbestos is insufficient to state a cause of action." Id. at 154 ; see also Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936, 942 (3d Cir.) (for purposes of F.E.L.A. claim, "manifest injury [is] a necessary element of an asbestos-related tort action"), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985). 13 We need not decide in this case whether the mere presence of pleural plaques co…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dunn v. HOVIC
In granting summary judgment for the defendants, the district court held that under Virgin Islands law, “a tort claim will not lie in the absence of a demonstrable injury [and] mere exposure to asbestos is insufficient to state a cause of action.” Id. at 154 ; see also Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936, 942 (3d Cir.) (for purposes of F.E.L.A. claim, “manifest injury [is] a necessary element of an asbestos-related tort action”), ce rt. denied, 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Caterinicchio v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp.
See also Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936, 942 (3d Cir.) (“subclinical injury resulting from exposure to asbestos is insufficient to constitute the actual loss or damage * * * required to sustain a cause of action under generally applicable principles of tort law”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985); In re Hawaii Fed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wilkerson v. CO Porter MacHinery Co.
Compare Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F. 2d 936, 942 (3 Cir.1985), cert. den. 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed. 2d 152 (1985), where the circuit held that asbestos-related diseases which did not reveal themselves until after the consummation of reorganization were not "claims," were not discharged, and that injured railroad employees can sue even the reorganized corporation.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In the Matter of CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL and PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Debtor. Appeal of CMC REAL ESTATE CORPORATION
See e.g., Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936, 942 (3rd Cir.1985), certiorari denied, 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 , where employees of railroad had been exposed to asbestos during their employment prior to the reorganization, but as of the reorganization had not experienced any adverse effects and thus did not possess claims dischargeable in bankruptcy.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Candell v. ITT Continental Baking Corp.
See, e.g., Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865, 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1986) (Administrator’s denial of severance benefits may be arbitrary and capricious where benefits policy was confidential, affirmatively withheld from eligible employees, where there was no claims procedure, and where plan was not reported to authorities, all in violation of virtually every applicable mandate of ERISA.); Beggs v. Mullins, 499 F.Supp. 916 (S.D.W.Vir. 1980) (Complete disregard of very persuasive evidence in support of pension entitlement amounts to arb…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Clinton Centrifuge, Inc.
See also Schweitzer v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 758 F.2d 936 (3rd Cir.) cert. denied, 474 U.S. 864 , 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985). 2 When, under applicable law, a right to payment does not exist prepetition (contingent, unmatured, disputed or otherwise), there can be no cognizable prepetition claim.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Devine v. Xerox Corp.
See also Blau v. Del Monte Corp., 748 F.2d 1348, 1353-54 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 183 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
READING COMPANY and Central Jersey Industries, Inc.
v.
Josephine SCHWEITZER
v.
Josephine SCHWEITZER
No. 84-2008.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 7, 1985.
106 S. Ct. 183
Cited by 9 opinions | Published
Citer courts: N.D. Mississippi (1) · E.D. Pennsylvania (1)
The motion of Penn Central Corporation for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The motion of Amatex Corporation for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.