Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 248 F.2d 935 - Mitchell v. Kroger Co.

Mitchell v. Kroger Co.’s Empirical Analysis

248 F.2d 935 · 1957

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
2
states following
October 2014
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably Wirtz v. C & P Shoe Corp. (1964), Brennan v. Iowa (1974)

25 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

2501957196019701980199020002010decided

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

Relies on Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Kirschbaum v. Walling US Arsenal Bldg Corporation · Walling v. Jacksonville Paper Co. · Phillips v. Walling US · McLeod v. Threlkeld

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

  1. ““ ‘Enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce’ means an enterprise which has employees engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, including employees handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods that have been moved in or produced for commerce by any person, and which— “(1) during the period February 1, 1967, through January 31, 1969, is an enterprise whose annual gross volume of sales made or business done is not less than $500,000 * * and beginning February 1, 1969, is an enterprise whose annual gross volume of sales made or business done is not less than $250,000 * * * ” 29 U.S.C. § 203 (s) (1964 Ed. Supp. II).”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““(2) [A]ny employee employed by any retail or service establishment * * * if more than 50 per centum of such establishment’s annual dollar volume of sales of goods or services is made within the State in which the establishment is located, and such establishment is not in an enterprise described in section 203 (s) of this title or such establishment has an annual dollar volume of sales which is less than $250,000 (exclusive of excise taxes at the retail level which are separately stated). A ‘retail or service establishment’ shall mean an establishment 75 per centum of whose annual dollar volume of goods and services (or of both) is not for resale and is recognized as retail sales or services in the particular industry.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “that the purpose of the Act was to extend federal control in this field throughout the farthest reaches of the channels of interstate commerce”
    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.