Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 384 F.2d 767 - Bledsoe v. Wirtz

Bledsoe v. Wirtz’s Empirical Analysis

384 F.2d 767 · 1967

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
May 2020
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently May 2020 · most notably Citizens Concerned for Separation of Church & State v. City of Denver (1980), Hodgson v. Humphries (1972)

25 federal appellate · 1 district ·

1301967197019801990200020102020decided

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 Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co. · Mitchell v. Lublin, McGaughy & Associates · Overstreet v. North Shore Corp. · McGrath v. Kristensen · Hopkins v. United States

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

  1. “Appellee claims that this court does not need to consider the issue of coverage of the Act on its merits, more particularly, that the appellants are estopped from arguing this point because they failed to raise the point during the first appeal. * * * However, coverage under the Fair Labor Standards Act by engagement in interstate commerce is more than a substantive issue in the trial of this cause of action. Jurisdiction in the Federal Courts depends solely upon a finding of engagement in interstate commerce and no diversity or jurisdictional amount need be shown. * * * The question of whether the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of a cause of action has primary importance and can be raised at any time even on the court’s own motion. * * * Therefore, since the issue of whether the defendants are engaged in interstate commerce so that they are covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act raises a jurisdictional issue it will be considered by this Court on this appeal even though not raised) on the first appeal. Bledsoe v. Wirtz, supra, 384 F.2d at 769, 770 .”
    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.