International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers v. Mack Trucks, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
820 F.2d 91 · 1987
Citation profile
60 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 122 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably General Motors Corporation Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Products Liability Litigation 94-1064 94-1194 94-1195 94-1198 94-1202 94-1203 94-1207 94-1208 94-1219 (1995), In Re: The Prudential Insurance Company Of America Sales Practices Litigation (1998)
60 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 29 U.S.C. § 101 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 102 (Norris-LaGuardia Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 108 (Norris-LaGuardia 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. · Universal Minerals, Inc. v. C. A. Hughes & Co. · Aetna Life Insurance v. Lavoie · Rath Packing Co. Creditors' Trust v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission · Sports Form, Inc. v. United Press International Inc.
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 122 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`rests upon a clearly erroneous finding of fact, an errant conclusion of law or an improper application of law to fact.'”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]n this case we have a ‘labor dispute,’ as defined in section 13, only in the most refined and technical sense. There is nothing in the complaint to suggest that either party is here using its economic powers in any way to bring pressure on the other. Here, there is a mere disagreement as to the meaning and effect of certain terms of the contract. This, we think, is not the type of Tabor dispute’ to which Norris-LaGuardia is directed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Company shall not exercise its option to select an alternate delivery system until the parties have reached mutual agreement on the terms and conditions including restrictions, limitations and definitions that would be applicable to any delivery system other than Blue Cross/Blue Shield.”
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.