Perez v. Trifiletti’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 141 (§ 1 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on Garner v. Teamsters, Chauffeurs & Helpers Local Union No. 776 · United Const Workers Affiliated with United Mine Workers of America v. Laburnum Const Corp · Allen-Bradley Local No 1111 United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers of America v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Board · International Union Uaw Af of Local 232 v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Board · United Construction Workers v. Laburnum Construction Corp.
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“". . . (I)t seems settled that while states are precluded from applying their `preventive' labor law in controversies affecting interstate commerce, their power to preserve the peace remains intact even though it be invoked in connection with a labor dispute. . . . See also International Union, UAW, AFL v. Wisconsin Emp. Rel. Bd., 1949, 336 U.S. 245, 254 , 69 S.Ct. 516 , 93 L.Ed. 651 , commonly referred to as the `Briggs-Stratton case' wherein certain types of unduly coercive conduct (of nebulous bounds) falling short of actual or threatened violence (intermittent and unannounced stoppages) was subject to state regulation." 74 So.2d at 102 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.