Rastall v. CSX Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 45 U.S.C. § 151 (Railway Labor Act)
Relies on Smith v. Evening News Assn. · Illinois v. City of Milwaukee · American Sterilizer Co. v. Sybron Corp. · Benz v. Compania Naviera Hidalgo, S. A. · Public Utilities Commission v. Pollak
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Defendants assert that since the contract explicitly requires arbitration under the RLA if grievance procedures fail, there have been numerous instances where Railway Adjustment Boards have dealt with grievances of Canadian-based employees covered by the contract. While this policy and practice under the agreement is thus clearly established, there is no indication that the union, the employer or the individuals involved ever questioned the authority of the Railway Adjustment Board process. This anomalous situation may well have occurred because Canadian law apparently insists upon arbitration in situations of this type. .Here, authority to arbitrate under the RLA is challenged and that challenge must be sustained as a matter of law in spite of past practice.”
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.