Costello v. Lipsitz’s Empirical Analysis
547 F.2d 1267 · 1977
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently August 2002 · most notably Sohyde Drilling & Marine Co. v. Coastal States Gas Producing Co. (1981), Crompton-Richmond Co. v. Briggs (1977)
20 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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. § 2201 · 29 U.S.C. § 186 (§ 302 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on Arroyo v. United States · United States v. Ryan · Head v. New Mexico Board of Examiners in Optometry · Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc. v. Walker · Moglia v. Geoghegan
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““money or [an]other thing of value paid to a trust fund established by such representative, for the sole and exclusive benefit of the employees of such employer, ... (or of such employees ... jointly with the employees of other employers making similar payments ...): Provided, That (A) such payments are held in trust for the purpose of paying ... for the benefit of employees ..., for medical and hospital care, ...; (B) the detailed basis on which such payments are to be made is specified in a written agreement with the employer, and employees and employers are equally represented in the administration of such fund ...; and (C) such payments as are intended to be used for the purpose of providing pensions or annuities for employees are made to a separate trust which provides that the funds held therein cannot be used for any purpose other than paying such pensions or annuities....” 12”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“. Although we wish to emphasize that none of the flagrant, impermissible abuses which gave birth to § 302 have occurred in this case, our decision is based upon the recognition that § 302 would be eviscerated should the phrase ‘employees and employers are equally represented in the administration of such fund’ connotate only the requirement that employees and employers have equal numbers of trustees, three each in this case, or representatives, [emphasis in original] [footnote omitted].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Because of the abuses that have occurred in the cauldron of labor-management interplay which include misuse of labor organization funds, extortion by labor personnel, and attempts by business personnel to influence or exert pressure on union “personnel” — particularly in financial form, restrictions on conduct between these two bodies and certain of their representatives have been imposed by Congress.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.