Davis v. Turner’s Empirical Analysis
395 F.2d 671 · 1968
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 1982
12 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 Mills v. Green · Calhoon v. Harvey · Boesche v. Udall · Wirtz v. Local 153 Glass Bottle Blowers Association · Jesse Colpo v. Highway Truck Drivers And Helpers, Local 107
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We agree. The rights asserted by appellants are those protected not by Title I, but by Title IV of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 481 et seq., as to which the exclusive method of enforcement is through complaint filed with the Secretary of Labor who, if he finds violation of the statutory provisions, may file suit in the appropriate district court to secure a new election to be held under his supervision. 29 U.S.C. § 482 (a) and (b); Calhoon v. Harvey, 379 U.S. 134 , 85 S.Ct. 292 , 13 L.Ed.2d 190 (1964). Further, even were we to find appellants’ contentions to be a valid subject for an individual union member’s suit under Title I, their, suit would have been aborted when the election they challenge was conducted. Colpo v. Highway Truck Drivers & Helpers Local 107, 305 F.2d 362 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 890 , 83 S.Ct. 188 , 9 L.Ed.2d 123 (1962). No individual suit to set aside a union election may be maintained, for § 403 of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 483 , provides that the Secretary of Labor’s action is the exclusive remedy ‘for challenging an election already conducted.’ See Note, 78 Harv.L.Rev. 1617 (1965); Note, 74 Yale L.J. 1282 (1965). [Emphasis supplied]”
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.