Trustees of Pension Welfare and Vacation Fringe Benefit Funds of Ibew Local v. Favia Electric Company Incorporated T & M’s Empirical Analysis
995 F.2d 785 · 1993
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably Lihli Fashions Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board (1996), Turley v. ISG Lackawanna, Inc. (2014)
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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
Relies on Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc. · Radio & Television Broadcast Technicians Local Union 1264 v. Broadcast Service of Mobile, Inc. · South Prairie Construction Co. v. Local No. 627, International Union of Operating Engineers · Selan v. Kiley · Daniels v. Essex Group, 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * the new employer is a “disguised continuance of the old employer” * * ■*; or was in active concert or participation in a scheme or plan of evasion * * *; or siphoned off assets for the purpose of rendering insolvent and frustrating a monetary obligation such as back pay * * *; or so integrated or intermingled its assets and affairs that- “no distinct corporate lines are maintained.” The Board has also found an alter ego relationship based on substantially identical business purposes, equipment, type of customers, actual joint day-to-day operations, joint labor relations, a favorable lease agreement, and the transient nature of the relationships between the companies. In some instances the criteria have been equated with the “basic indicia for finding a single employer, ie., interrelation of operations, centralized control of labor relations, common management, and common ownership or financial control” although “more must be ■shown to establish that one organization is the alter ego of another.” We have also found an alter ego relationship to exist “even though no evidence of actual common ownership was present.” ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“This Circuit discussed the alter ego doctrine in Esmark, Inc. v. N.L.R.B., stating that [t]he Board’s “alter ego” doctrine is similar [to the single employer doctrine]: generally, one corporation is the alter ego of another where the factors necessary to support a “single employer” finding are met and, in addition, the Board finds that the second corporation is a “disguised continuance” of the employing enterprise, resulting in evasion of the employer’s obligations under the labor laws. 887 F.2d 739, 754 (7th Cir.1989)”
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.