Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
1,591 federal appellate · 62 district · 318 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 2,634 later decisions (67 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth (1972), Vaca v. Sipes (1967)
1,591 federal appellate · 62 district · 318 state decisions — followed in 27 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
reviewedEast Bay Union of MacHinists Local 1304, United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio, and United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation, Intervenor. Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, East Bay Union of MacHinists Local 1304, United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio, and United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio, Intervenors (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 141 (§ 1 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. · Phelps Dodge Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board · National Labor Relations Board v. Katz
Cited together with Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. National Labor Relations Board · National Labor Relations Board v. Gissel Packing Co. · National Labor Relations Board v. Seven-Up Bottling Co. of Miami, Inc. · National Labor Relations Board v. Katz
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 2,634 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“unless it can be shown that the order is a patent attempt to achieve ends other than those which can fairly be said to effectuate the policies of the Act.”
134 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“not among those `managerial decisions, which lie at the core of entrepreneurial control'”
32 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“(a). It shall be an unfair labor practice for an employer — "(1) to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section 157 of this title; * * * * * "(5) to refuse to bargain collectively with the representatives of his employees, subject to the provisions of section 159(a) of this title. * * * * * "(d) For the purposes of this section, to bargain collectively is the performance of the mutual obligation of the employer and the representative of the employees to meet at reasonable times and confer in good faith with respect to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment, or the negotiation of an agreement, or any question arising thereunder, and the execution of a written contract incorporating any agreement reached if requested by either party, but such obligation does not compel either party to agree to a proposal or require the making of a concession * * *.”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.