Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 428 F.2d 994 - National Labor Relations Board v. Local 282, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers

National Labor Relations Board v. Local 282, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers’s Empirical Analysis

428 F.2d 994 · 1970

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
3
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

34 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently June 2015 · most notably Powell v. Ward (1981), United States v. The J. B. Williams Company, Inc., and Parkson Advertising Agency, Inc. (1974)

34 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

36019701980199020002010decided

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 United States v. United Mine Workers of America · McComb v. Jacksonville Paper Co. · National Labor Relations Board v. Express Publishing Co. · Stevens v. Marks · Local 761, International Union of Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers 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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “This latter interest, the interest which the doctrine of res judicata serves in all of its applications, militates in favor of barring collateral attacks upon permanent injunctions in civil contempt proceedings as well as in criminal ones. Here Local 282 could have sought review of the breadth of the injunction we issued by a petition for a rehearing, by a petition for a writ of certiorari, or con ceivably by a petition for a writ of prohibition. These remedies do not appear to have been attempted and, of course, the litigation of issues which have been or could be litigated in a given case should reach repose when final judgment in that case is entered.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““there must be a separate gate marked and set apart from other gates; the work done by the men who use the gate must be unrelated to the normal operations of the employer and the work must be of a kind that would not, if done when the plant were engaged in its regular operations, necessitate curtailing those operations.” 366 U.S. at 681 , 81 S.Ct. at 1293 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In those cases where injunctions have been found overbroad, it has been held that there was no evidence that the enjoined party had proceeded in the past or would proceed in the future to violate any labor rights other than those of the particular .parties named in the decree.”
    2 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.