Andrews v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
561 federal appellate · 148 district · 172 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,502 later decisions (24 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2023 · most notably Patterson v. McLean Credit Union (1989), United States v. Gaudin (1995)
561 federal appellate · 148 district · 172 state decisions — followed in 24 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
reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 151 (§ 1 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 45 U.S.C. § 153 (Railway Labor Act) · 5 U.S.C. § 551 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946)
Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Mapp v. Ohio · Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala. · Republic Steel Corp. v. Maddox · Allied Chemical & Alkali Workers of America, Local Union No. 1 v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co.
Cited together with Elgin Ry Co v. Burley · Union Pacific Railroad v. Sheehan · Vaca v. Sipes · Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Chicago River & Indiana Railroad · Glover v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co.
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 1,502 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in at least some situations the Act makes the federal administrative remedy exclusive, rather than merely requiring exhaustion of remedies in one forum before resorting to another. A party who has litigated an issue before the Adjustment Board on the merits may not relitigate that issue in an independent judicial proceeding.”
25 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“implies some sort of statutory or contractual standard that modifies the traditional commonlaw rule that a contract of employment is terminable by either party at will. Here it is conceded by all that the only source of petitioner's right not to be discharged, and therefore to treat an alleged discharge as a”
23 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Provision for arbitration of a discharge grievance, a minor dispute, is not a matter of voluntary agreement under the Railway Labor Act; the Act compels the parties to arbitrate minor disputes before the National Railroad Adjustment Board established under the Act. Thus, the notion that the grievance and arbitration procedures provided for minor disputes in the Railway Labor Act are optional, to be availed of as the employee or the carrier chooses, was never good history and is no longer good law.”
7 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.