Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 494 F.2d 379 - Western v. Hodgson

Western v. Hodgson’s Empirical Analysis

494 F.2d 379 · 1974

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
3
states following
January 2010
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently January 2010

7 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

10019741980199020002010decided

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 Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Brown v. Allen · J. I. Case Co. v. Borak · Allen v. State Board of Elections · Harris v. Balk

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

  1. ““Restriction on discharge from employment by reason of garnishment (a) No employer may discharge any employee by reason of the fact that his earnings have been subjected to garnishment for any one indebtedness. (b) Whoever willfully violates subsection (a) of this section shall be fined not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “§ 1673 (a) Maximum allowable garnishment. Except as provided in subsection (b) and in section 305 [15 USCS § 1675], the maximum part of the aggregate disposable earnings of an individual for any workweek which is subject to garnishment may not exceed (1) 25 per centum of his disposable earnings for that week, or (2) the amount by which his disposable earnings for that week exceed thirty times the Federal minimum hourly wage prescribed by section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 [29 ÜSCS § 206(a)(1) ] in effect at the time the earnings are payable, whichever is less.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[u]nder most State statutes, the term 'garnishment' denotes a proceeding whereby a plaintiff seeks to subject to his claim property of the defendant in the hands of a third person, or money owed by a third person to the defendant”
    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.