Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 528 F.2d 69 - Gustave D. Toensing v. E. A. Brown

Gustave D. Toensing v. E. A. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

528 F.2d 69 · 1975

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
May 1993
most recently cited

24 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1993 · most notably National Labor Relations Board v. Amax Coal Co. (1981), International Union United Automobile Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America Uaw v. Yard-Man Incorporated (1983)

24 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions

270197519801990decided

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 Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Allied Chemical & Alkali Workers of America, Local Union No. 1 v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. · Roark v. Lewis · Lee v. Nesbitt

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

  1. “Since retirees are not members of the bargaining unit, the bargaining agent is under no statutory duty to represent them in negotiations with the employer. This does not mean that when a union bargains for retirees — which nothing in this opinion precludes if the employer agrees — the retirees are without protection. Under established contract principles, vested retirement rights may not be altered without the pensioner’s consent. See generally Note, 70 Col.L.Rev. 909, 916-920 (1970). The retiree, moreover, would have a federal remedy under § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act for breach of contract if his benefits were unilaterally changed. See Smith v. Evening News Assn., 371 U.S. 195, 200-201 [ 83 S.Ct. 267, 270-271 , 9 L.Ed.2d 246 ] (1962); Lewis v. Benedict Coal Corp., 361 U.S. 459, 470 [ 80 S.Ct. 489, 495 , 4 L.Ed.2d 442 ] (1960).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “We wish to emphasize, however, that trustees have a duty to exercise their independent judgment in administering trust funds established under § 302 of the Labor Management Relations Act. Recommendations of collective bargaining parties may be adopted by the trustees in the exercise of their discretion, but such recommendations are not binding or obligatory. Toensing v. Brown, supra, 528 F.2d at 72 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “If the union does undertake to represent retirees, its duty of fair representation requires that their vested retirement rights not be disturbed.”
    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.