National Labor Relations Board v. Denver Building & Construction Trades Council’s Empirical Analysis
341 U.S. 675 · 1951
Citation profile
1,395 federal appellate · 103 district · 110 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 2,240 later decisions (74 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2022 · most notably Garner v. Teamsters, Chauffeurs & Helpers Local Union No. 776 (1954), National Woodwork Manufacturers Ass'n v. National Labor Relations Board (1967)
1,395 federal appellate · 103 district · 110 state decisions — followed in 21 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
reviewedDenver Building & Construction Trades Council v. National Labor Relations Board (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. · International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. National Labor Relations Board · NLRB v. Fain-Blatt
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 2,240 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the dual congressional objectives of preserving the right of labor organizations to bring pressure to bear on offending employers in primary labor disputes and of shielding unoffending employers and others from pressures in controversies not their own.”
57 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Even when the effect of activities on interstate commerce is sufficient to enable the Board to take jurisdiction of a complaint, the Board sometimes properly declines to do so, stating that the policies of the Act would not be effectuated by its assertion of jurisdiction in that case.”
17 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Under clause (A) [of § 8 (b) (4)] strikes or boycotts, or attempts to induce or encourage such action, were made unfair labor practices if the purpose was to force an employer or other person to cease using, selling, handling, transporting, or otherwise dealing in the products of another, or to cease doing business with any other person. Thus it was made an unfair labor practice for a union to engage in a strike against employer A for the purpose of forcing that employer to cease doing business with employer B. Similarly it would not be lawful for a union to boycott employer A because employer A uses or otherwise deals in the goods of, or does business with, employer B." H. R. Rep. No. 510, 80th Cong., 1st Sess. 43. [15]”
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.