Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 644 F.2d 467 - Christopher v. Safeway Stores, Inc.

Christopher v. Safeway Stores, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

644 F.2d 467 · 1981

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
December 2006
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently December 2006 · most notably Hicks v. Quaker Oats Co. (1981), Talbot v. Robert Matthews Distributing Co. (1992)

25 federal appellate · 2 district ·

290198119902000decided

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 29 U.S.C. § 159 (§ 9 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 401 (Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959) · 29 U.S.C. § 411 · 29 U.S.C. § 412

Relies on Vaca v. Sipes · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · Hall v. Cole · Calhoon v. Harvey · Freeman v. Continental Gin Co.

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.

  1. “Every member of a labor organization shall have equal rights and privileges within such organization to nominate candidates, to vote in elections or referendums of the labor organization, to attend membership meetings, and to participate in the deliberations and voting upon the business of such meetings, subject to reasonable rules and regulations in such organization’s constitution and bylaws.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In Hall , the Supreme Court established the “common benefits” rationale for awarding attorney’s fees when the plaintiff’s successful litigation confers substantial benefit on members of an ascertainable class. No bad faith need be shown, and the trial court’s exercise of its equitable power to award fees is not to be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Christopher and Luce protested to their union representative that their seniority shielded them from a lay-off. In response the union representative furnished a copy of the 1976-1978 collective bargaining agreement between the Union and Safeway, the contract then in effect, which provided for seniority on a”
    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.