National Labor Relations Board v. Southwestern Colorado Contractors Ass'n’s Empirical Analysis
379 F.2d 360 · 1967
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently October 1991 · most notably Sanford Bros. Boats, Inc. v. Vidrine (1969), Herbert Harvey, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board (1969)
22 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 National Labor Relations Board v. Reliance Fuel Oil Corp. · National Labor Relations Board v. Sheridan Creations, Inc. · National Labor Relations Board v. Tulsa Sheet Metal Works, Inc. · Rossano v. Blue Plate Foods, Inc. · National Labor Relations Board v. Sklar
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Respondents also attack the subject order on procedural grounds. They object first to the use of leading questions under Rule 43(b), Fed.R. Civ.P., in General Counsel’s cross-examination of witness Royce, the Association’s secretary up until its dissolution. Such questioning would be allowable, say respondents, only if Royce were the managing agent of an existing association of which all respondent businesses were members. We think respondents’ emphasis on the continuing formal existence of the Association is misplaced. By virtue of Royce’s status as the proprietor ■ of one of the respondent firms as well as his former official position within the Association, his interests and sympathies were clearly aligned with those of the other respondent. See generally Journeymen Plasterers’ Protective & Benevolent Society of Chicago, v. NLRB, 7 Cir., 341 F.2d 539 , 544; Rossano v. Blue Plate Foods, Inc., 5 Cir., 314 F.2d 174 , 178-179. Accordingly, with respect to questions propounded to him by General Counsel, he was properly treated as an adverse and hostile witness under Rule 43(b).” 379 F.2d 360 , 364-365.”
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.