Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 217 F.2d 210 - Mitchell v. Stinson

Mitchell v. Stinson’s Empirical Analysis

217 F.2d 210 · 1954

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
August 2005
most recently cited

13 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2005

13 federal appellate ·

60195419601970198019902000decided

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. § 202 · 29 U.S.C. § 206 (Equal Pay Act of 1963) · 29 U.S.C. § 207 · 29 U.S.C. § 213 · 29 U.S.C. § 215

Relies on Phillips v. Walling US · Powell v. United States Cartridge Co. · Walling v. W. D. Haden Co. · McComb v. Consolidated Fisheries Co.

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

  1. “[T]he words of the exemption are: “Employees employed, as seamen”. The italicized words mean something; they are not mere tautology. They warn us to look to what the employees do, and not to rest on a mere matter of a name, or the place of their work.... [W]hat he does is expressly made the test of exclusion.”
    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.