Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 365 F.2d 651 - Holden Brown, George House and George Wolff v. Sterling Aluminum Products Corporation, a Missouri Corporation

Holden Brown, George House and George Wolff v. Sterling Aluminum Products Corporation, a Missouri Corporation’s Empirical Analysis

365 F.2d 651 · 1966

Citation profile

60
cited by 60 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 60 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2020 · most notably Vaca v. Sipes (1967), Lerwill v. Inflight Motion Pictures Inc (1978)

28 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions

2001966197019801990200020102020decided

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 United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · United Steelworkers of America v. Enterprise Wheel and Car Corp · Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala. · John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston · Republic Steel Corp. v. Maddox

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

  1. “. . . whenever the right sought to be enforced is not uniquely personal to the individual but is a right possessed by the bargaining unit as a whole, only the Union as the sole representative of that unit would normally have the standing to enforce the right. Thus the individual would have no standing to compel discussion of broad collective bargaining principles such as the re-negotiation of a new contract . . . Id. at 657.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “for an individual to bring an action under Sec. 301 he must be seeking to enforce a right that is personal to him and vested in him at the time of the suit.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “No agreement contained in the collective bargaining contract to submit any question of interpretation of the contract to arbitration, nor (was) there any agreement (in the contract) to settle disputes thereunder by submission to an arbitrator or some other board.”
    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.