National Labor Relations Board v. Indiana & Michigan Electric Co.’s Empirical Analysis
318 U.S. 9 · 1943
Citation profile
291 federal appellate · 4 district · 32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 381 later decisions (21 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2022 · most notably National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. (1975), Radio Officers' Union of the Commercial Telegraphers Union v. National Labor Relations Board (1954)
291 federal appellate · 4 district · 32 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedNational Labor Relations Board v. Indiana & Michigan Electric Co. (from Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Stromberg v. People of State of California · International Ass'n of Machinists; Tool & Die Makers Lodge No. 35 v. National Labor Relations Board · Southport Petroleum Co. v. National Labor Relations Board · Holley v. Lawrence
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 381 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[Cjourts which are required upon a limited review to lend their enforcement powers to the Board’s orders are granted some discretion to see that the hearings out of which the conclusive findings emanate do not shut off a party’s right to produce evidence or conduct cross-examination material to the issue.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The influence of lawless force directed toward parties or witnesses to proceedings during their pendency is so sinister and undermining of the process of adjudication itself that no court should regard it with indifference or shelter it from exposure and inquiry.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(c) The testimony taken by such member, agent, or agency or the Board shall be reduced to writing and filed with the Board. Thereafter, in its discretion, the Board upon notice may take further testimony or hear argument. If upon the preponderance of the testimony taken the Board shall be of the opinion that any person named in the complaint has engaged in or is engaging in any such unfair labor practice, then the Board shall state its findings of fact and shall issue and cause to be served on such person an order requiring such person to cease and desist from such unfair labor practice, and to take such affirmative action including reinstatement of employees with or without back pay, as wiE effectuate the policies of this subchapter: * * * If upon the preponderance of the testimony taken the Board shall not be of the opinion that the person named in the complaint has engaged in or is engaging in any such unfair labor practice, then the Board shall state its findings of fact and shall issue an order dismissing the said complaint. No order of the Board shaE require the reinstatement of any individual as an employee who has been suspended or discharged, or the payment to him of any back pay, if such individual was suspended or discharged for cause. In case the evidence is presented before a member of the Board, or before an examiner or examiners thereof, such member, or such examiner or examiners as the case may be, shall issue and cause to be served on the parties to the proc”
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.