International Ass'n of Machinists; Tool & Die Makers Lodge No. 35 v. National Labor Relations Board’s Empirical Analysis
311 U.S. 72 · 1940
Citation profile
894 federal appellate · 6 district · 49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,091 later decisions (59 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2024 · most notably National Labor Relations Board v. Hearst Publications, Inc. (1944), Thomas v. Collins (1945)
894 federal appellate · 6 district · 49 state decisions — followed in 13 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedInternational Ass'n v. National Labor Relations Board (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on National Licorice Co. v. National Labor Relations Board · National Labor Relations Board v. Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc. · Amalgamated Utility Workers v. Consolidated Edison Co. · National Labor Relations Board v. Bradford Dyeing Ass'n
Cited together with National Labor Relations Board v. Link-Belt Co. · H. J. Heinz Co. v. National Labor Relations Board · Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Franks Bros. v. National Labor Relations Board · National Labor Relations Board v. Bradford Dyeing Ass'n
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 1,091 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[i]t is for the Board, not the courts, to determine how the effect of prior unfair labor practices may be expunged.'”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The employer * * * may be held to have assisted * * * a union even though the acts of the so-called agents were not expressly authorized or might not be attributable to him on strict application of the rules of respondeat superior. We are dealing here not with private rights * * * nor with technical concepts pertinent to an employer's legal responsibility to third persons * * * but with a clear legislative policy to free the collective bargaining process from all taint of an employer's compulsion, domination, or influence.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'employees would have just cause to believe that he was acting for and on behalf of the company.'”
7 later decisions 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.