Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 627 F.2d 272 - Air Line Pilots Association International v. Northwest Airlines Inc Air Line Pilots Association International

Air Line Pilots Association International v. Northwest Airlines Inc Air Line Pilots Association International’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
3
states following
July 2013
most recently cited

7 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently July 2013 · most notably McLendon v. Continental Group, Inc. (1985), Puchert v. Agsalud (1984)

7 district · 4 state decisions

1701980199020002010decided

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 Bell v. Hood · Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co. · Hagans v. Lavine · Boys Markets, Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union, Local 770 · Oneida Indian Nation of New York State v. County of Oneida New York

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. ““Nothing in this title [ ] shall be construed to alter, amend, modify, invalidate, impair, or supersede any law of the United States (except as provided in sections 1031 and 1137(b) of this title) or any rule or regulation issued under any such law.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In the light of the plain directive of section 514(d), unsoftened as it is by anything in ERISA’s history or background, we cannot balance ERISA against the Railway Labor Act, as ALPA invites us to do, so as to interpret the former "to alter, amend, modify, invalidate, impair, or supersede” the compulsory arbitration provisions of the Labor Act. Nor are we persuaded that the legislative history of ERI-SA reveasl an affirmative Congressional intention to do away with all compulsory arbitration for pension maters____ There is nothing in this history to show that Congress also wanted to change, repeal, or modify a prior Congressional enactment, like the Railway Labor Act____”
    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.