Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 159 F.2d 395 - Walling v. Clinchfield Coal Corp.

Walling v. Clinchfield Coal Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

159 F.2d 395 · 1946

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
November 2009
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently November 2009

5 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

801946195019601970198019902000decided

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. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956)

Relies on Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co. · Tennessee Coal Iron Co v. Muscoda Local No 123 Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co · Jewell Ridge Coal Corporation v. Local No. 6167, United Mine Workers of America · Walling v. Haile Gold Mines, Inc. · Fleming v. Phipps

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

  1. ““The rule is well settled that the extraordinary writ of injunction will not issue for the purpose of punishing past offenses, but will issue only in those cases where the court is convinced that such relief is necessary to prevent future violations.””
    4 later decisions 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.