Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 547 F.2d 135 - Carr v. Learner

Carr v. Learner’s Empirical Analysis

547 F.2d 135 · 1976

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
April 2004
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently April 2004 · most notably Lambert v. Kysar (1993), Chiplin Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Lebanon (1983)

21 federal appellate · 4 district ·

1401976198019902000decided

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

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 29 U.S.C. § 501

Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Vaca v. Sipes · Bell v. Hood · Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food MacHinery & Chemical Corp. · Eisenstadt v. Baker

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

  1. “we are not bound by the label below, and agree that the case should have been dismissed.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The officers . . . and other representatives of a labor organization occupy positions of trust in relation to such organization and its members as a group. It is, therefore, the duty of each such person, taking into account the special problems and functions of a labor organization, to hold its money and property solely for the benefit of the organization and its members and to manage, invest, and expend the same in accordance with its constitution and bylaws and any resolutions of the govern ing bodies adopted thereunder, to refrain from dealing with such organization as an adverse party or in behalf of an adverse party in any matter connected with his duties and from holding or acquiring any pecuniary or personal interest which conflicts with the interests of such organization. ... A general exculpatory provision in the constitution and bylaws of such a labor organization or a general exculpatory resolution of a governing body purporting to relieve any such person of liability for breach of the duties declared by the section shall be void as against public policy.”
    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.