Hanson v. Lagerstrom’s Empirical Analysis
133 F.2d 120 · 1943
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1968
10 federal appellate · 4 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. § 151 (§ 1 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956)
Relies on United States v. Darby · Kirschbaum v. Walling US Arsenal Bldg Corporation · Warren-Bradshaw Drilling Co. v. Hall · Enterprise Box Co. v. Fleming · Consolidated Timber Co. v. Womack
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * an employee shall be deemed to have been engaged in the production of goods if such employee was employed in producing, manufacturing, mining, handling, transporting, or in any other manner working on such goods, or in any process or occupation necessary to the production thereof, in any State.” (Italics mine)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We are in accord with that view. Defendant stresses certain facts as indicating that the cook house in the camp, was not an indispensable part of the defendant’s operations and that camps could be operated without a cook house where farmers and shackers might be employed, and it is pointed out that such camps now produce about 70 or 75 percent of the timber for pulpwood. “The proximity of hotels at Little Falls and Big Falls, Minnesota, the presence of a highway running past the -camp within 150 feet, and other roads kept open the year around, with many men owning cars of their own, are cited as indicating the non-essential character of the cook house. It is also, said that-the cost of production is the same whether the camp method is used or farmers and shackers are hired. But these suggestions are aside from the question. The fact that defendant might have employed other methods, thus avoiding the necessity of maintaining a cook house, is not important. We we here ‘confronted with a condition and not a theoryf. We must here confine our consideration to what was actually done and not to what might ha.ve been done.” 133 F.2d at page 122„ (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“any employee engaged in any retail or service establishment the greater part of whose selling or servicing is in intrastate commerce”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McLeod v. Threlkeld
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.