Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 524 F.2d 756 - NF&M Corp. v. United Steelworkers

NF&M Corp. v. United Steelworkers’s Empirical Analysis

524 F.2d 756 · 1975

Citation profile

85
cited by 85 later decisions
4
states following
September 2021
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 5 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 85 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably National Post Office Mailhandlers Watchmen Messengers and Group Leaders Division Laborers International Union of North America v. United States Postal Service F (1985), Roadway Package System, Inc. v. Kayser (2001)

28 federal appellate · 5 district · 5 state decisions

460197519801990200020102020decided

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 Steelworkers of America v. Enterprise Wheel and Car Corp · United States v. Radio Television News Directors Ass'n · Ludwig Honold Mfg. Co. v. Fletcher · Electronics Corp. of America v. International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers, AFL-CIO Local 272

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 85 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “if an examination of the record before the arbitrator reveals no support whatever for his determinations, his award must be vacated.”
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'manifest disregard of the agreement, totally unsupported by principles of contract construction and the law of the shop, may a reviewing court disturb the award.'”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “it is irrelevant whether the courts agree with the arbitrator’s application and interpretation of the agreement ... [w]here it is possible that the arbitrator could have been interpreting the contract, his failure to apply correct contract principles is irrelevant; the arbitrator’s contract interpretation must be irrational before a reviewing court may disturb the award.”
    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.