157 F. Supp. 2d 419 - Phillips v. Selig’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447 · 29 U.S.C. § 152 (§ 2 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams · Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala. · Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Taylor · Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Lueck
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1) the nature of the actor’s conduct; 2) actor’s motive; 3) interests of the other with which the actor’s conduct interferes; 4) the interests sought to be advanced by the actor; 5) the proximity or remoteness of the actor’s conduct to the interference; and 6) the relations between the parties.”
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.