McLeod v. United Auto Workers’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 158 (§ 8 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 160 (§ 10 of the National Labor Relations Act)
Relies on National Labor Relations Board v. Denver Building & Construction Trades Council · Local 761, International Union of Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers v. National Labor Relations Board · Flying Tiger Line, Inc. v. Philippine Air Lines, Inc. · Seafarers International Union of North America v. National Labor Relations Board · National Labor Relations Board v. Business Machine & Office Appliance Mechanics Conference Board, Local 459
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The Court believes that this type of activity is within the purview of the Act even though the secondary employer has suffered little or no damage. It is sufficient if the unoffending secondary employer is subject to pressures in a controversy not its own. N. L. R. B. v. Denver Bldg. & Const. Tr. C., 1951, 341 U.S. 675 , 71 S.Ct. 943 , 95 L.Ed. 1284 ; see also Teamsters Local 135, 1955, 114 N.L.R.B. 639 , and 105 Cong.Rec. 16254-55, September 2, 1959; Legis.Hist. 1388. Moreover, the action of respondent herein has interfered with the contractual duty of Eagle to redeliver the goods to its bailor. Local 135, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 1960, 126 N.L.R.B. 251 ; see also Retail Fruit & Vegetable Clerks Union, etc. v. N. L. R. B., 9 Cir., 1957, 249 F.2d 591 . « ■K1 # * “Lastly, this is not a situs situation within the purview of the Moore Dry Dock Case (Sailors’ Union of the Pacific, 1950, 92 N.L.R.B. 547 ) or Seafarers International Union, etc. v. N. L. R. B., supra, because there is no sharing of a common situs by Intertype and Eagle. Intertype has a permanent place of business which is being effectively picketed and one of the objectives of the picketing against Eagle is pressure upon the secondary employer. Under the circumstances the situs of the nine (9) finished machines crated and stored for shipment in a neutral warehouse cannot be considered as a partial situs of this labor dispute. Neither by the situs test nor by the nature of work test is this boycott ju”
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.