Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 780 F.2d 361 - West v. Conrail

West v. Conrail’s Empirical Analysis

780 F.2d 361 · 1985

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
May 1992
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 153 (§ 3 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 160 (§ 10 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 Vaca v. Sipes · DelCostello v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters · Hines v. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc. · Steele v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad · Phelps Dodge Corporation 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Moreover, since mailing does not actually notify the defendant, the Board's mailing rule indicates that the real purpose of section 10(b)'s service requirement is to ensure prompt service. In federal courts, this promptness, to the degree deemed necessary, is already ensured by Rule 4(a) 4 Significantly, in applying the six-month period of section 10(b) to the two consolidated cases under consideration in DelCostello, the Court focused on the time of filing and never mentioned the time of service. See 462 U.S. at 172 , 103 S.Ct. at 2294 (”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “The balance struck by Congress and recognized in DelCostello is reflected in the language of 10(b), which unambiguously requires both filing and service of process within six months of the accrual of the cause of action. We are reluctant to upset that balance by grafting Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 4(j) onto 10(b), particularly since doing so would increase the time limit for initiation of the dispute resolution process form six to ten months, a substantial addition.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “Provided, That no complaint shall issue based upon any unfair labor practice occurring more than six months prior to the filing of the charge with the Board and the service of a copy thereof upon the person against whom such charge is made____”
    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.