Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 619 F.2d 157 - Skidmore v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

Skidmore v. Consolidated Rail Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

619 F.2d 157 · 1979

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
December 2009
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently December 2009 · most notably Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. (1985), Radin v. United States (1983)

19 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

1301979198019902000decided

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 45 U.S.C. § 153

Relies on Andrews v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad · Atlas Roofing Company Inc v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission Irey · Railway Employes' Department v. Hanson · Wicks v. Southern Pacific Co. · Brotherhood of Railway Airline and Steamship Clerks v. Kansas City Terminal Railway Company

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

  1. “1. The Board failed to comply with the requirements of the Railway Labor Act. 2. The Board’s decision failed to conform or confine itself to matters within the scope of the [Board’s] jurisdiction. 3. The decision was the product of fraud or corruption.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “functions solely as an impartial adjudicatory tribunal”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “First, we are not persuaded that the NRAB did misinterpret the labor agreement. . . . Second, if we were so persuaded, we could still only grant relief on the specious theory that the NRAB is without jurisdiction to make mistakes, with its corollary that in spite of the limiting language of § 153 First (q) a party is entitled to a virtually de novo review whenever he asserts error by the NRAB.... Like any other adjudicatory body, the NRAB is not perfect, and will make mistakes from time to time. Under appellant’s expansive notion of what to count as a jurisdictional defect in an NRAB action, the district court would have ongoing authority to remedy all of these errors. But our power is circumscribed sharply by the clear congressional plan under which NRAB decisions may not easily be set aside by the courts. Thus even if we thought the NRAB had erred in this case (which we do not), we could not overturn its decision.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.