Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 90 PACOMMW 553 - Bishop v. Commonwealth

Bishop v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
August 1990
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Page's Department Store v. Velardi · Philco Corp. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review · Erie Forge & Steel Corp. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review · Small Tube Products, Inc. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review · 74 Pa. Commw. 181 - McCormick Dray Lines, Inc. v. Commonwealth

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In the instant case an examination of the record leads to the conclusion that the Union’s offer to return to work under a written contract for a period of one year was, in fact, an attempt to obtain a final end to the negotiations through a contract for a period of one year. The Union’s offer was not an attempt to return to work for a reasonable period of time pending negotiation of a new agreement. It is clear from the record that the employer had already agreed to indefinitely extend the contract while negotiations continued. The employer only refused to sign a contractural commitment which would have constituted a settlement of the negotiations. Thus, the offer by the Union was not an offer to continue the status quo for a reasonable period of time while the negotiations proceeded. 5”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Have the employees offered to continue working for a reasonable time under the pre-existing terms and conditions of employment so as to avert a work stoppage pending the final settlement of the contract negotiations; and has the employer agreed to permit work to continue for a reasonable time under the pre-existing terms and conditions of employment pending further negotiations? If the employer refuses to so extend the expiring contract and maintain the status quo, then the resulting work stoppage constitutes a ‘lockout’ and the disqualification for unemployment compensation benefits in the case of a ‘stoppage of work because of a labor dispute’ does not apply.”
    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.