Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 702 F.2d 273 - Courier-Citizen Company v. Boston Electrotypers Union No. 11, International Printing & Graphic Communications Union of North America

Courier-Citizen Company v. Boston Electrotypers Union No. 11, International Printing & Graphic Communications Union of North America’s Empirical Analysis

702 F.2d 273 · 1983

Citation profile

107
cited by 107 later decisions
3
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

46 federal appellate · 24 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 107 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Galindo v. Stoody Co. (1986), Miller Brewing Company v. Brewery Workers Local Union No (1984)

46 federal appellate · 24 district · 3 state decisions

48019831990200020102020decided

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. § 151 (§ 1 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 157 (§ 7 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 158 (§ 8 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))

Relies on United Steelworkers of America v. Enterprise Wheel and Car Corp · Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala. · San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon · Radio Officers' Union of the Commercial Telegraphers Union v. National Labor Relations Board · Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Mullins

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

  1. “'the NLRB's refusal to issue a complaint does not act as res judicata ... [and] no collateral estoppel effect attaches to such refusal.' " Id. at 1351 (citations omitted). The First Circuit has likewise held that "the Regional Director's refusal to issue a complaint does not collaterally estop the charging party from litigating the matter in a later suit under section 301.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “While an arbitrator has broad power to fashion remedies on issues the parties have empowered him to resolve, he lacks authority to decide questions the parties have not agreed to submit to him.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Absent a contractual provision to the contrary, an arbitrator is free to decide that rigid adherence to a prior award would impair the process of flexibly resolving current or future disputes.”
    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.