Bresgal v. Brock’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 3121 (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 29 U.S.C. § 1802 (Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 29 U.S.C. § 203
Relies on Busic v. United States · Phillips v. Walling US · United States v. Fisher · Johnson v. United States · Sagebrush Rebellion, Inc. v. Watt
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]t is inconceivable that Congress intended to protect workers planting fruit trees in an orchard, and to disregard workers planting fir trees on a hillside, when both groups suffer from the same clearly identified harm.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bresgal v. Brock · Bresgal v. Brock“packaging, processing, freezing, or grading,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bresgal v. Brock · Bresgal v. Brock“The Committee has been informed by the Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service that some government agencies have permitted the employment of illegal aliens as tree planters, thinners and other forest laborers by awarding contracts to forestry contractors who regularly employ aliens who have illegally entered the United States. The provision of this bill and its penalties are intended to apply to such contractors. 14”
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.