Dudo v. Schaffer’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 29 U.S.C. § 186 (§ 302 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Daniel · Ristaino v. Ross · Wetzel v. Liberty Mutual Insurance · Walsh v. E a Schlecht · Daniel v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The plaintiff does not contend that any break in employment rule is invalid. To prevail in his claim the plaintiff will prove that the present break in service rule is unreasonable and hence invalid insofar as it causes the forfeiture of prior credited service even where the break is involuntary or was induced by the Union and the [Trust Fund]. 82 F.R.D. at 698 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dudo v. Schaffer“[C]ourts often define classes to include persons who have not yet been affected by the challenged policies, but who may be affected by them in the future.”
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.