Gardiner v. Sea-Land Service, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
786 F.2d 943 · 1986
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 9 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Frederick v. Kirby Tankships, Inc. (2000), Baldassaro v. United States (1995)
36 federal appellate · 9 district · 10 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 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1333 · 29 U.S.C. § 159 (§ 9 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala. · Hannahville Indian Community v. United States · The Osceola · Texas Industries, Inc. v. Radcliff Materials, Inc.
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Accordingly, it does not modify Lipscomb's entitlement to unearned wages under the general maritime law. 6 We turn, then, to the meaning of unearned wages under the general maritime law. B. 7 Under the general maritime law, a seaman who falls ill or becomes injured while in the service of a ship is entitled to”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'the policy of our national labor legislation to encourage both labor and management to negotiate contracts that will effectively regulate every aspect of their complex relationship.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]hen a benefits package includes an express reference to a precise rate of maintenance, the adequacy of this rate, considered in isolation, is not a subject for judicial speculation when the rate is part of a total package of wages and benefits resulting from the process of collective bargaining.”
3 later decisions 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.