Richmond Tank Car Company v. National Labor Relations Board’s Empirical Analysis
721 F.2d 499 · 1983
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently December 2013
1 federal appellate ·
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. § 160 (§ 10 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 173 (§ 203 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · United Steelworkers of America v. Enterprise Wheel and Car Corp · Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe · Gateway Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers · Dreis & Krump Manufacturing Co. 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“unless the Board clearly departs from its own standards on deferral.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the policy favoring the settling of labor disputes by arbitration.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“clearly repugnant to the purposes and policies of the Act”
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.