Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 729 F.2d 172 - Local One Amalgamated Lithographers of America v. National Labor Relations Board

Local One Amalgamated Lithographers of America v. National Labor Relations Board’s Empirical Analysis

729 F.2d 172 · 1984

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
May 2006
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently May 2006 · most notably Kinney Drugs, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board (1996), Idaho State Insurance Fund v. Hunnicutt (1986)

17 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

140198419902000decided

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. § 157 (§ 7 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 158 (§ 8 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 160 (§ 10 of the National Labor Relations Act)

Relies on Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Richardson v. Perales · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · National Labor Relations Board v. Gissel Packing Co. · National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp.

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

  1. “'Substantial evidence means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “it is undisputed that if the employer fires an employee for having engaged in union activities and has no other basis for the discharge, or if the reasons that he proffers are pretextual, the employer commits an unfair labor practice. He does not violate the [Act], however, if any antiunion animus that he might have entertained did not contribute at all to an otherwise lawful discharge for good cause.”
    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.