Liner v. Jafco, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
282 federal appellate · 48 district · 103 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 751 later decisions (50 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2023 · most notably Vaca v. Sipes (1967), Friends of the Earth Incorporateds v. Laidlaw Environmental Services Inc (2000)
282 federal appellate · 48 district · 103 state decisions — followed in 24 states
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 28 U.S.C. § 1257 · 29 U.S.C. § 152 (§ 2 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 160 (§ 10 of the National Labor Relations Act)
Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon · Fiswick v. United States · Foti v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Sola Electric Co. v. Jefferson Electric 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 751 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to review moot cases derives from the requirement of Article III of the Constitution under which the exercise of judicial power depends upon the existence of a case or controversy.”
26 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The petitioners plainly have a substantial stake in the judgment' [affirming an injunction] which exists apart from and is unaffected by the [injunction's dissolution]. Their interest derives from ... respondent's] ... injunction bond [requiring it] to indemnify them in damages if the injunction was 'wrongfully' sued out.”) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). Here, the underlying injunction included no such bond. Consol. Appx at 37. (”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Tlie allegations of the complaint, as well as the findings of the Georgia Supreme Court, made' out at least an arguable violation of §8 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U. S. C. § 158 (b). Consequently, the state court had no jurisdiction to issue an injunction or to adjudicate this controversy, which lay within the exclusive powers of the National Labor Relations Board. . . . Nor is the jurisdiction of the Georgia courts sustainable, as respondents urge, by reason of the Georgia right-to-work law. . . .” (pp. 546, 547.)”
3 later decisions 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.