804 F. Supp. 1494 - Stewart v. Everett’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 1801 (Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 29 U.S.C. § 1811 (Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 29 U.S.C. § 1841 (Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 29 U.S.C. § 1854 (Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Daniel v. Security Pacific National Bank · Clark v. Coats & Clark, Inc. · WCLR Radio Station v. Rengers
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If the court finds that the respondent has intentionally violated any provision of this chapter or any regulation under this chapter, it may award damages up to and including an amount equal to the amount of actual damages, or statutory damages of up to $500 per plaintiff per violation, or other equitable relief, except that (A) multiple infractions of a single provision of this chapter or of regulations under this chapter shall constitute only one violation for purposes of determining the amount of statutory damages due a plaintiff; and (B) if such complaint is certified as a class action, the court shall award no more than the lesser of up to $500 per plaintiff per violation, or up to $500,000 or other equitable relief.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rodriguez v. Carlson
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.