Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 952 F.2d 781 - Haggerty v. USAir, Inc.

Haggerty v. USAir, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

952 F.2d 781 · 1992

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
May 2025
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently May 2025

12 federal appellate · 2 district ·

1801992200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1658 · 29 U.S.C. § 160 (§ 10 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Wilson v. Garcia · DelCostello v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters · Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson · International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America v. Hoosier Cardinal Corp. · Agency Holding Corporation v. Malley-Duff & Associates Inc Crown Life Insurance Company

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

  1. “[I]t is not easy to find a state limitations period that is an appropriate analogy.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “as with the NLRA, the Department of Labor has had a role in administering the EPP”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “. Although Staudt urged the tort period in his brief, by oral argument, he evidently had changed his mind, stating a preference for the residuary period, and expressly disavowing a preference for the contracts period (the period selected by the Second Circuit). Given the difficulty in identifying a single Texas limitations period that is most analogous, we concur with a sentiment expressed by the Third Circuit in its decision to apply the NLRA's limitations period to actions under the Employee Protection Program of the Airline Deregulation Act:”
    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.