Textile Workers Union of America v. Darlington Manufacturing Company’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
420 federal appellate · 15 district · 23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 652 later decisions (31 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2023 · most notably National Labor Relations Board v. Gissel Packing Co. (1969), National Labor Relations Board v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co. (1978)
420 federal appellate · 15 district · 23 state decisions
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
reviewedDarlington Manufacturing Company and Deering Milliken, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, Textile Workers Union of America, Afl-Cio, Intervenor. Textile Workers Union of America, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, Darlington Manufacturing Company and Deering Milliken, Inc., Intervenors. National Labor Relations Board v. Deering Milliken and Company, Inc. (from Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 157 (§ 7 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 158 (§ 8 of the National Labor Relations Act)
Relies on Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston · Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Radio Officers' Union of the Commercial Telegraphers Union v. National Labor Relations Board · Republic Aviation Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board
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 652 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(I)t is only when the interference with § 7 rights outweighs the business justification for the employer's action that § 8(a)(1) is violated.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The closing of an entire business, even though discriminatory, ends the employer-employee relationship; the force of such a closing is entirely spent as to that business when termination of the enterprise takes place. On the other hand, a discriminatory partial closing may have repercussions on what remains of the business, affording employer leverage for discouraging the free exercise of § 7 rights among remaining employees of much the same kind as that found to exist in the “runaway shop" and "temporary closing" cases.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * a partial closing is an unfair labor practice under § 8(a) (3) if motivated by a purpose to chill unionism * * * and if the [E]mployer may reasonably have foreseen that such closing will likely have that effect.”
6 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.