United Mine Workers v. Pennington’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
966 federal appellate · 342 district · 319 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 2,788 later decisions (62 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of Carpenters (1983), California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited (1972)
966 federal appellate · 342 district · 319 state decisions — followed in 38 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
reviewedLocal 175 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. United States (from Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 15B (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 41 U.S.C. § 35
Relies on Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc. · Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. United States · Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Continental Ore Company v. Union Carbide and Carbon Corporation
Cited together with Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc. · California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited · United Mine Workers of America v. M Pennington Local Union No 189 Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America · Parker v. Brown · Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.
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 2,788 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Joint efforts to influence public officials do not violate the antitrust laws even though intended to eliminate competition. Such conduct is not illegal, either standing alone or as part of a broader scheme itself violative of the Sherman Act.”
80 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[o]ne group of employers may not conspire to eliminate competitors from the industry and the union is liable with the employers if it becomes a party to the conspiracy.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“established judicial rule of evidence that testimony of prior or subsequent transactions, which for some reason are barred from forming the basis for a suit, may nevertheless be introduced if it tends reasonably to show the purpose and character of the particular transactions under scrutiny.”
14 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.