Donovan Construction Co. v. Construction, Production & Maintenance Laborers Union Local 383’s Empirical Analysis
533 F.2d 481 · 1976
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 1998
5 federal appellate ·
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. W. T. Grant Co. · Boys Markets, Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union, Local 770 · Sinclair Refining Co. v. Atkinson · Securities & Exchange Commission v. Medical Committee for Human Rights · Amalgamated Transit Union, Division 1384 v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The events and circumstances leading to the Boys Markets decision are by now so familiar as to make a full recitation of them unnecessary. We pause only to repeat that the accommodation reached by the Supreme Court between the anti-injunction provisions of the Norris-La Guardia Act and section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act is restricted to a closely circumscribed class of cases, and that injunctive relief issued thereby must be conditioned upon a detained set of factual findings... 28 ... each restraint imposed by a Boys Markets injunction must be grounded on a finding by the District Court that the activity restrained is a proper subject for injunctive relief despite the Norris-La Guardia Act. If the scope of the injunction is so broad as to enjoin union activity in situations that the court could not have found to be suitable for Boys Markets relief, because of the paucity of factual support for the necessary findings, the injunction crosses the jurisdictional boundary of the Norris-La Guardia Act. We believe the injunction here crossed that boundary.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“can adduce convincing evidence that the anticipated labor dispute is sufficiently likely to occur, and that the harm threatened thereby is of such magnitude as to bring his situation within the Boys Markets guidelines.”
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.