Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 133 F.2d 306 - Walling v. T. Buettner & Co.

Walling v. T. Buettner & Co.’s Empirical Analysis

133 F.2d 306 · 1943

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
June 1975
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently June 1975 · most notably United States v. Cappetto (1974), Franke v. Wiltschek (1953)

16 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

1401943195019601970decided

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. § 215 · 29 U.S.C. § 217

Relies on United States v. United States Steel Corp. · Securities & Exchange Commission v. Torr · Fleming v. Phipps · Fleming v. National Bank of Commerce · Shore v. United States

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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““A court of equity will not afford an injunction to prevent in the future that which in good faith has been discontinued before the suit for injunction was brought, and where there is no evidence that the offense is likely to be repeated in the future. Courts of equity are not to be used to punish past offenses, but only in a proper case to prevent wrongdoing in the future. [Citing-eases.] The remedy is never afforded on suspicion or on the ungrounded fear that the offense may be repeated in the future. * * * Employers who are acting in good faith and endeavoring to comply with the law should not be harassed by the processes of a court of equity coercing them to do what they are willing to do and are trying to do voluntarily. Equity will promptly respond to meet a violation or a threatened violation, and it will as emphatically refuse its aid where none is made to appear.” 133 F.2d 306 , at page 308. 5”
    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.