Hooper v. Polychrome, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 160 (§ 10 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 2101 (§ 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 2102 (§ 3 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Kerr v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California · Applied Genetics International, Inc. v. First Affiliated Securities, 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[E]ven assuming that a significant number of employees of either facility spent a portion of their time at the other facility, we cannot equate this periodic occurrence with the 'shifting,' 'rotating' or even 'sharing' of employees of a non-'separate' workforce....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]e do not believe that the use of isolated pieces of equipment ... mandates a determination of 'single site' status.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Taken together, these regulations suggest that proximity and contiguity are the most important criteria for making single site determinations. They, in fact, establish whether a site will be presumed a single or multiple site. However, once a court makes the contiguous/noncontiguous determination the operational, managerial and labor variables become the decisive factors and can defeat or reinforce the presumptions established by the proximity and contiguity factors.”
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.