Smith v. Union Carbide Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1445 · 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Lueck · Republic Steel Corp. v. Maddox · Local 174 Teamsters Chaukfeurs Warehousemen Helpers of America v. Lucas Flour Company · Clanton v. Cain-Sloan Co.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'although not explicitly created by the statute, is necessaty to enforce the duly of the employer, to secure the rights of the employee and to carry out the intentions of the legislature.’ ” Smith, 664 F.Supp. at 291 -92 (citing Clanton v. Cain-Sloan Co., 677 S.W.2d 441 (Tenn.1984)). Therefore, the district court held the”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(c) A civil action in any State court arising under the workmen’s compensation laws of such State may not be removed to any district court of the United States.”
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.