National Labor Relations Board v. J. P. Stevens & Co.’s Empirical Analysis
563 F.2d 8 · 1977
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently November 2011 · most notably National Labor Relations Board v. Blevins Popcorn Co. (1981), Seibert v. Sperry Rand Corp. (1978)
25 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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
Relies on United States v. United Mine Workers of America · McComb v. Jacksonville Paper Co. · O’Callahan v. Parker, Warden · Davis v. Alaska · Muniz v. Hoffman
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Respondents argue, however, that, even if there were violations of the order, the violations were not willful, and they maintain that they should not be found in civil contempt unless they acted with deliberate or careless disregard of our prior order. This contention ... misconstrues the purpose of a civil contempt proceeding where the contemnor is offered the opportunity to purge himself of contempt by complying with prescribed purgation conditions. In this context, the long-standing rule is that good faith or lack of wilfulness is not a defense that the petitioner must negate. The rule is a salutary one, for the purpose of a motion for civil contempt ... “is not to punish intentional misconduct, but rather to enforce compliance with an order of the court and to remedy any harm inflicted on one party by the other party’s failure to comply.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“not bound by the narrow scope of review applicable to the Master's factual findings, but instead may accept, reject, or modify his recommendations in order to provide `full remedial relief.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“that the employees' ability to learn the advantages of self-organization is in any way dependent upon the union's access to such ... information”
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.