National Labor Relations Board v. Plasterers' Local Union No. 79’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
219 federal appellate · 18 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 378 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2018 · most notably Green v. Bock Laundry MacHine Co. (1989), United States v. Wells (1997)
219 federal appellate · 18 district · 13 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
reviewedPlasterers Local Union No. 79 v. National Labor Relations Board (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)) · 29 U.S.C. § 158 (§ 8 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 160 (§ 10 of the National Labor Relations Act)
Relies on Boys Markets, Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union, Local 770 · Carey v. Westinghouse Electric Corp. · National Labor Relations Board v. Acme Industrial Co. · Michigan v. Ohio · Gemsco, Inc. v. Walling
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 378 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. . . the impact of the Sec. 10(k) decision is felt in the Sec. 8(b)(4)(D) hearing because for all practical purposes the Board's award determines who will prevail in the unfair labor practice proceeding. If the picketing union persists in its conduct despite a Sec. 10(k) decision against it, a Sec. 8(b)(4)(D) complaint issues and the union will likely be found guilty of an unfair labor practice and be ordered to cease and desist. On the other hand, if that union wins the Sec. 10(k) decision and the employer does not comply, the employer's Sec. 8(b)(4)(D) case evaporates and the charges he filed against the picketing union will be dismissed.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(U) pon such voluntary adjustment of the dispute, such charge shall be dismissed.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““forcing or requiring any employer to assign particular work to employees in a particular labor organization or in a particular trade, craft, or class rather than to employees in another labor organization or in another trade, craft, or class, unless such employer is failing to conform to an order or certification of the Board determining the bargaining representative for employees performing such work.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. LaPorte Transit Co. v. Local Union No. 301 · Charles M. Henderson, Regional Director of Region 19 of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on Behalf of the National Labor Relations Board v. International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union Local 50, International Union of Operating Engineers Local 701, International Union of Operating Engineers Local 701, Pacific Maritime Association v. National Labor Relations Board
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.