Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 217 F.2d 701 - Harry Hoy and Michael R. Schuster v. Progress Pattern Company

Harry Hoy and Michael R. Schuster v. Progress Pattern Company’s Empirical Analysis

217 F.2d 701 · 1954

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
September 1987
most recently cited

24 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently September 1987 · most notably Bohn Aluminum & Brass Corp. v. Storm King Corp. (1962), Wheeler v. Hurdman (1987)

24 federal appellate ·

1101954196019701980decided

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 Kennedy v. Silas Mason Co. · Frederick Hart & Co. v. Recordgraph Corp. · Begnaud v. White · Chappell v. Goltsman · Estepp v. Norfolk & W. Ry. 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ * * * In determining the issue in the present case, it is necessary to know and consider all of the facts bearing upon appellants’ employment including its origin, the nature and extent of appellants’ authority and duties, and the actual relationship existing between them and the dominant stockholders and officers of the appellee corporation, regardless of the titles which were conferred by the corporation upon these workers. In our opinion, there exists such a factual question, shown by the affidavit in opposition to the motion, as prevents this matter being disposed of on the basis of the one affidavit filed in support of the motion to dismiss. The issue, to be raised by a proper pleading, should be fully developed by evidence offered at the time of trial.””
    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.