570 F. Supp. 41 - Abbott v. Donovan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “(1) that a significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers’ firm or an appropriate subdivision of the firm have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated, (2) that sales or production, or both, of such firm or subdivision have decreased absolutely, and (3) that increases of imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles produced by such workers’ firm or an appropriate subdivision thereof contributed importantly to such total or partial separation, or threat thereof, and to such decline in sales or production.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Retail Clerks International Union, Local 149F v. Donovan · 594 F. Supp. 744 - Katunich v. Donovan

2. “Any examination of the causation standard must begin with the statute itself. Section 222 provides that “the term ‘contributed importantly’ means a cause which is important but not necessarily more important than any other cause.” The statute offers little assistance in ascertaining the precise meaning to be accorded the word “important.” Hence, the court may seek guidance from the accompanying legislative history. The relevant history reveals that Congress intended that “a cause * * * be significantly more than de minimus to have contributed importantly.” S.Rep. No. 93-1298, 93rd Cong., 2d Sess. 133, reprinted in 1974 U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 7186, 7275. Yet, Congress strongly advised against the use of “any mechanical designation such as a percentage of causation.” Id. By way of example, the Senate Report noted that if a factor, other than imports, was “so dominant” that any separation from employment and decline in sales or production would have occurred despite the presence of increased imports, the Secretary could not find that a petition satisfied the statutory causation requirement. Id. Indeed, it is evident that any separation resulting from “domestic competition, seasonal, cyclical or technological factors,” regardless of the level of import penetration, is not sufficient to qualify a worker for certification of eligibility for trade adjustment assistance benefits. Id.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 614 F. Supp. 1245 - Estate of Finkel v. Donovan

3. “(1) there are 25 service departments which provide auxiliary and support services to the 33 production departments at the Marion plant; (2) auxiliary and support services are supplied to the production departments on an “as needed” basis; (3) the Dana Corporation does not maintain records of the time spent by the service workers in providing support services to the 33 production departments at the Marion plant; (4) the Dana Corporation provided the Secretary with an estimate of the number of hours per work week expended by the Marion plant service departments directly related to the production of journal crosses and bearing races; (5) the estimate disclosed an uneven distribution of support activities by the service workers to production Departments 225 and 230; (6) the estimate revealed that some service workers, e.g., millwrights and machine repairman, expended a higher percentage of their time in support of Departments 225 and 230 than did other service workers; and (7) no data was furnished documenting the extent of the service workers’ activities for the remaining 31 production departments.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 588 F. Supp. 1438 - Abbott v. Donovan