Grant v. Local 638’s Empirical Analysis
373 F.3d 104 · 2004
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Wetzel · Carson v. American Brands, Inc. · Baltimore Contractors, Inc. v. Bodinger · Local Number 93, International Ass'n of Firefighters v. City of Cleveland · Local 28 of the Sheet Metal Workers' International Ass'n v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In any case, it is certain that Local 28 [the would-be appellant] has not shown irreparable harm of the type envisioned in Carson. The district court’s order does not, as did the order in Carson, effectively foreclose the parties from negotiating a settlement.... Because the district court made no comments similar to those of the district court in Carson, there is no indication that it would never allow a modification of injunctive relief similar to that in the proposed consent decree.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“may be deprived of [their] opportunity to settle this case ... on terms as favorable as those contained in the settlement agreement. However ... more is required in order to find irreparable harm”
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.