Lane Crane Service, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 177’s Empirical Analysis
704 F.2d 550 · 1983
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently September 2017
13 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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. § 106 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 152 (§ 2 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 158 (§ 8 of the National Labor Relations Act)
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · The Boeing Company v. Daniel C. Shipman · Moses Lake Homes, Inc. v. Grant County · Superior Derrick Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, National Labor Relations Board v. Seafarers' International Union of North America, Atlantic and Gulf District, Harbor and Inland Waterways Division, Afl-Cio · Cora Pub, Inc. v. Continental Casualty 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“will be considered unlawful if any object of the picketing is for an unlawful purpose. The picketing will be unlawful if there is an expectation or a hope or a desire that employees of the secondary employer will be induced or encouraged to take concerted action to quit working behind the picket line in order that a prohibitive secondary effect on the primary employer will occur.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“reasonable men could not arrive at a contrary verdict.”
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.