In re Highway Truck Drivers & Helpers Local Union # 107’s Empirical Analysis
888 F.2d 293 · 1989
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 12 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently February 2017 · most notably Maritime Electric Co. v. United Jersey Bank (1991), Robert Gruntz Robert Gruntz v. Opinion County of Los Angeles (2000)
18 federal appellate · 12 district · 2 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 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 11 U.S.C. § 363 · 11 U.S.C. § 364 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 158 · 28 U.S.C. § 1738 · 29 U.S.C. § 186 (§ 302 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on Younger v. Harris · District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman · Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co. · United States v. Munsingwear, Inc. · Torres v. Oakland Scavenger 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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although as a general rule a party need not seek a stay of a lower court’s judgment in order to protect its right to appeal, the “consequence of failing to obtain a stay is that the prevailing party may treat the judgment of the district court as final_” Thus, in the absence of a stay, action of a character which cannot be reversed by the court of appeals may be taken in reliance on the lower court’s decree. As a result, the court of appeals may become powerless to grant the relief requested by the appellant. Under such circumstances, the appeal will be dismissed as moot.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘[I]t is obligatory upon appellant ... to pursue with diligence all available remedies to obtain a stay of execution of the objectionable order (even to the extent of applying to the Circuit Justice for relief ...), if the failure to do so creates a situation rendering it inequitable to reverse the orders appealed from.’”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We believe these authorities clearly illustrate that, in addition to those situations covered under [Sec. 363(m) ] ... a myriad of circumstances can occur that would necessitate the grant of a stay pending appeal in order to preserve a party's position.”
2 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.