Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 424 F.2d 124 - Vincent v. Local 294, International Brotherhood of Teamsters

Vincent v. Local 294, International Brotherhood of Teamsters’s Empirical Analysis

424 F.2d 124 · 1970

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

23 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably International Business MacHines Corporation v. United States of America, International Business MacHines Corporation, and Cravath, Swaine & Moore v. United States of America, International Business MacHines Corporation v. David N. Edelstein, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southerndistrict of New York, and United States of America (1974), Halderman v. Pennhurst State School & Hospital (1982)

23 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

18019701980199020002010decided

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. United Mine Workers of America · Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co. · Sibbach v. Wilson & Co. · Penfield Co of California v. Securities & Exchange Commission · Fox v. Capital 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Since the complainant in the main cause is the real party in interest with respect to a compensatory fine or other remedial order in a civil contempt proceeding, if for any reason complainant becomes disentitled to the further benefit of such order, the civil contempt proceeding must be terminated (emphasis added).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a]n order and adjudication in civil contempt was entered ... directing appellant to purge itself of civil contempt by fully complying with [a prior] injunction order, and upon failure to do so, to pay a fine of $200 a day for every day it continued in noncompliance with that order.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[w]here ... civil contempt proceedings are instituted after the conclusion of the principal action rather than during the pendency of the action, the order disposing of the contempt proceedings is appealable.”
    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.