Salzhandler v. Caputo’s Empirical Analysis
316 F.2d 445 · 1963
Citation profile
90 federal appellate · 15 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 176 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2017 · most notably Hall v. Cole (1973), Linn v. United Plant Guard Workers of America, Local 114 (1966)
90 federal appellate · 15 district · 5 state decisions
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 29 U.S.C. § 411 · 29 U.S.C. § 412 · 29 U.S.C. § 529
Relies on Beauharnais v. Illinois · 199 F. Supp. 554 - Salzhandler v. Caputo
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 176 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the right . . . to adopt and enforce reasonable rules as to the responsibility of every member toward the organization as an institution and to his refraining from conduct that would interfere with its performance of its legal or contractual obligations.”
19 later decisions quote this exact passage“The LMRDA of 1959 was designed to protect the rights of union members to discuss freely and criticize the management of their unions and the conduct of their officers. The legislative history and the extensive hearings which preceded the enactment of the statute abundantly evidence the intention of the Congress to prevent union officials from using their disciplinary powers to silence criticism and punish those who dare to question and complain.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“Any person whose rights secured by the provisions of this subchapter have been infringed by any violation of this subchapter may bring a civil action in a district court of the United States for such relief (including injunctions) as may be appropriate. Any such action against a labor organization shall be brought in the district court of the United States for the district where the alleged violation occurred, or where the principal office of such labor organization is located.”
5 later decisions 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.