Transit Mix Concrete Corporation v. Local Union No International Brotherhood of Teamsters Chauffeurs Warehousemen and Helpers of America’s Empirical Analysis
809 F.2d 963 · 1987
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently November 2022 · most notably JLM Industries, Inc. v. Stolt-Nielsen SA (2004), Vera v. Saks & Company (2003)
7 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
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. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers · United Steelworkers v. American Manufacturing Co. · John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston · Nolde Bros., Inc. v. Local No. 358, Bakery & Confectionery Workers Union
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.
“since arbitration is a matter of contract ... a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'[a]n order to arbitrate the particular grievance should not be denied unless it may be said with positive assurance that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute. Doubts should be resolved in favor of coverage.' " Id. (quoting Warrior & Gulf Navigation, 363 U.S. at 582-83, 80 S.Ct. at 1353). This "presumption of arbitrability”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Questions as to the applicability of the finality clause — in the sense of whether the Lippman award adjudicated the issues raised in the present dispute — or as to its effect — in the sense of the res judicata effect of the Lippman award — are assigned, at least in the first instance, to the ... arbitrator.”
2 later decisions 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.