Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. National Labor Relations Board’s Empirical Analysis
338 U.S. 355 · 1949
Citation profile
130 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 181 later decisions (13 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2017 · most notably Radio Officers' Union of the Commercial Telegraphers Union v. National Labor Relations Board (1954), Local Lodge No 1424 v. National Labor Relations Board (1960)
130 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 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
reviewedColgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. National Labor Relations Board (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 151 (§ 1 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 158 (§ 8 of the National Labor Relations Act)
Relies on Wallace Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board · Algoma Plywood & Veneer Co. v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Board · 25 Cal. 2d 721 - James v. Marinship Corp. · 16 Cal. 2d 379 - Shafer v. Registered Pharmacists Union Local 1172
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 181 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The question we have here is whether a closed shop contract, entered into and performed in good faith, and valid in the State where made, protects an employer from a charge of unfair labor practice under the National Labor Relations Act. * * * “ ‘The Board found the closed-shop agreement to have been validly entered into in conformity with the proviso to Section 8(3) of the Act, The Board con- eluded, however, that, by virtue of the indefinite term of the contract, which had run for more than four years, the employees undertook to oust the C.I.O. as their bargaining representative at a period during which it was appropriate to seek a redetermination of representatives.’ * # * “Congress knew that a closed shop would interfere with the freedom of employees to organize in another union, and would, if used, lead inevitably to discrimination in tenure of employment. * * * “It is not necessary for us to justify the policy of Congress. It is enough that we find it in the statute. That policy cannot be defeated by the Board’s policy, which would make aii unfair labor practice out of that which is authorized by the Act. * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * cannot be defeated by the Board's policy, which would make an unfair labor practice out of that which is authorized by the Act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“To achieve stability of labor relations was the primary objective of Congress in enacting the National Labor Relations Act.”
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.