Scott v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
640 F.2d 708 · 1981
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently May 2003 · most notably Sun Banks of Florida Inc v. Sun Federal Savings and Loan Association, Kimble v. D. J. McDuffy, Inc. (1981)
19 federal appellate · 6 district · 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 18 U.S.C. § 241 · 29 U.S.C. § 102 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 104 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 105 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 106 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 107 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 113 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 157 (§ 7 of the National Labor Relations Act)
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Estelle v. Gamble · New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Griffin v. Breckenridge
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Norris-LaGuardia Act was enacted for the purpose of limiting the circumstances and conditions under which in-junctive action could be taken against labor organizations in the context of a labor dispute. The labor injunction had been an important device used by employers to counter organized labor’s most effective economic weapons, strikes, boycotts, and picket lines. However, the Act was predicated on the conviction that labor disputes turned on issues of social and economic policy that could not appropriately be resolved by the courts. The legislative solution to the problems confronting workers in a complex industrial economy was union organization and collective bargaining. Since the ready issuance of labor injunctions presented a serious obstacle to the concerted activities of organized workers, Congress decided to remove the federal judiciary from labor disputes. Scott v. Moore, 640 F.2d 708, 713 (5th Cir. 1981).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) The defendants must conspire or go in disguise on the highway or premises of another; (2) for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws; and (3) one or more of the conspirators must commit some act in furtherance of the conspiracy; whereby (4) another is either (a) injured in his person or property or (b) deprived of having and exercising any right of privilege of a citizen of the United States.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“No court of the United States shall have jurisdiction to issue any restraining order or temporary or permanent injunction in any case involving or growing out of any labor dispute to prohibit any person or persons participating or interested in such a dispute (as these terms are herein defined) from doing, whether singly or in concert, any of the following acts: (a) Ceasing or refusing to perform any work or to remain in any relation of employment^]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.