Mitchell v. Pidcock’s Empirical Analysis
299 F.2d 281 · 1962
Citation profile
68 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 104 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2024 · most notably United States v. Jefferson County Board of Education (1966), Chris-Craft Industries, Inc. v. Piper Aircraft Corp. (1973)
68 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
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 United States v. W. T. Grant Co. · Olmstead v. United States · Hecht Co. v. Bowles · Rodriguez v. New York · Meredith v. City of Winter Haven
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 104 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘[t]he injunctive processes are a means of effecting general compliance with national policy as expressed by Congress, a public policy judges too must carry out— actuated by the spirit of the law and not begrudgingly as if it were a newly imposed fiat of a presidium.’”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In such a case as this, only after an administrative order has been formulated and a court has adjudicated that the order is within the administrator’s statutory authority does the command of a court come into existence, disobedience of which may be punished as contempt. For violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act as such, one may be made to suffer civil penalties or imprisonment, but the latter only after conviction by a jury. For violation of the command of an injunction issued under the Act, however, he may not only be exposed to more severe civil penalties than the Act by its own terms imposes, but made to suffer imprisonment without benefit of jury trial. It is for such reasons that this Court has indicated again and again that a statute cannot properly be made the basis of contempt proceedings merely by incorporating a ref erence to its broad terms into a court order. These considerations become increasingly important as there is increasing use of injunctions for the enforcement of administrative orders and statutory duties.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the decision whether to issue an injunction against further violations rests primarily in the discretion-judicial discretion-of the trial court.”
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.