Sinclair Refining Co. v. Atkinson’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
429 federal appellate · 59 district · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 974 later decisions (55 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2023 · most notably Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California (1983), Rodriguez De Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc. (1989)
429 federal appellate · 59 district · 38 state decisions — followed in 11 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. A case is still cited after being overruled — to note the reversal, distinguish it, or in dissent. 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
reviewedSinclair Refining Co. v. Atkinson (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 29 U.S.C. § 102 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 104 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 106 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 108 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 113 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 160 (§ 10 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 178 (§ 208 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
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. · United Steelworkers v. American Manufacturing Co. · Local 174 Teamsters Chaukfeurs Warehousemen Helpers of America v. Lucas Flour Company
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 974 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A District Court entertaining an action under § 301 may not grant injunctive relief against concerted activity unless and until it decides that the case is one in which an injunction would be appropriate despite the Norris-LaGuardia Act. When a strike is sought to be enjoined because it is over a grievance which both parties are contractually bound to arbitrate, the District Court may issue no injunctive order until it first holds that the contract does have that effect; and the employer should be ordered to arbitrate, as a condition of his obtaining an injunction against the strike. Beyond this, the District Court must, of course, consider whether issuance of an injunction would be warranted under ordinary principles of equity — whether breaches are occurring and will continue, or have been threatened and will be committed; whether they have caused or will cause irreparable injury to the employer; and whether the employer will suffer more from the denial of an injunction than will the union from its issuance. 370 U.S. at 228 , 82 S.Ct. at 1346 . (Emphasis in original.)”
40 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“(s) uits for violation of contracts between an employer and a labor organization representing employees in an industry representing commerce,”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“No court of the United States shall have jurisdiction to issue any restraining order or temporary or permanent injunction in any case involving or growing out of any labor dispute to prohibit any person or persons participating or interested in such dispute (as these terms are herein defined) from doing, whether singly or in concert, any of the following acts: (a) Ceasing or refusing to perform any work or to remain in any relation of employment. .”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.