Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 323 U.S. 192 - Steele v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad

Steele v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad’s Empirical Analysis

323 U.S. 192 · 1944

Citation profile

3,151
cited by 3,151 later decisions
238
cited 238 times by the Supreme Court
32
states following
January 2025
most recently cited

1,395 federal appellate · 235 district · 255 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3,151 later decisions (238 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2025 · most notably Conley v. Gibson (1957), Vaca v. Sipes (1967)

1,395 federal appellate · 235 district · 255 state decisions — followed in 32 states

7430194419501960197019801990200020102020decided

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

Relies on Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Tumey v. State of Ohio · Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States · Virginian Ry Co v. System Federation No 40

Cited together with Ford Motor Co v. Huffman International Union United Automobile Aircraft and Agricultural Implementworkers of America Ci · Vaca v. Sipes · Tunstall v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen & Enginemen · Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Howard · Humphrey v. Moore

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 3,151 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““This does not mean that the statutory representative of a craft is barred from making contracts which may have unfavorable effects on some of the members of the craft represented. Variations in the terms of the contract based on differences relevant to the authorized purposes of the contract in conditions to which they are to be applied, such as differences in seniority, the type of work performed, the competence and skill with which it is performed, are within the scope of the bargaining representation of a craft, all of whose members are not identical in their interest or merit.””
    38 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “`a duty to exercise [its] power in their interest and behalf.'”
    16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a group which is in large part chosen by the (defendants) against whom their real complaint is made.”
    9 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.