Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 711 F.2d 383 - Automobile Salesmen's Union Local United Food and Commercial Workers Union v. National Labor Relations Board

Automobile Salesmen's Union Local United Food and Commercial Workers Union v. National Labor Relations Board’s Empirical Analysis

711 F.2d 383 · 1983

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
September 2016
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2016 · most notably International Longshoremen's Ass'n v. Davis (1986), Local International Union of Electrical Radio and Machine Workers v. National Labor Relations Board (1984)

22 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

2101983199020002010decided

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 National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp. · Allied Chemical & Alkali Workers of America, Local Union No. 1 v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. · American Ship Building Company v. National Labor Relations Board · National Labor Relations Board v. Insurance Agents' International Union · Ford Motor Company v. National Labor Relations Board

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

  1. “a pattern of conduct aimed at coercing employees in the exercise of Section 7 rights”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “incidental or secondary effect on the employees [from the discharge of a supervisor for union activity] is insufficient to warrant an exception to the general statutory provision excluding supervisors from the protection of the Act.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “analysis for supervisory discharge cases during the six-year delay before issuing its decision here, and held instead that the discharge of a supervisor is unlawful only when”
    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.