Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 230 F.2d 576 - International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. W. L. Mead, Inc.

International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. W. L. Mead, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

230 F.2d 576 · 1956

Citation profile

71
cited by 71 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
July 1991
most recently cited

46 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 71 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1991 · most notably Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala. (1957), Local 174 Teamsters Chaukfeurs Warehousemen Helpers of America v. Lucas Flour Company (1962)

46 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions

24019561960197019801990decided

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 11 U.S.C. § 501 · 28 U.S.C. § 1349 · 28 U.S.C. § 1442 · 29 U.S.C. § 158 (§ 8 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 164 (§ 14 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))

Relies on Gully v. First Nat. Bank in Meridian · National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. · Osborn v. President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States · Association of Westinghouse Salaried Employees v. Westinghouse Electric Corp. · NLRB v. Fain-Blatt

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

  1. “Congress cannot confer upon the lower federal courts a jurisdiction beyond the cases to which the judicial power of the United States extends under Art. III....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “If the continued validity of a collective bargaining agreement which is the subject of suit under § 301 depends on the effectiveness of a notice of termination, this must be determined by the federal court upon an application of the rules laid down in § 8(d) of the act . ..”
    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.