Dougherty v. Parsec, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
824 F.2d 1477 · 1987
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently March 2008
8 federal appellate · 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. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 29 U.S.C. § 157 (§ 7 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 29 U.S.C. § 660 (§ 11 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970)
Relies on United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Lueck · Raphan v. United States · Zerman v. Melton · Local 408, International Brotherhood of Teamsters 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[rjegardless of how the tortious interference with contract claim is defined, the terms of the labor agreement will have to be scrutinized to determine if [SSR] induced its breach. * * * The only contract with which any interference could be charged is the collective bargaining agreement. An interference claim could not exist in the absence of such agreement, which in turn is exclusively to be determined under federal law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]hen resolution of a state-law claim is substantially dependent upon analysis of the terms of an agreement made between the parties to a labor contract, that claim must either be treated as a Sec. 301 claim ... or dismissed as preempted by federal labor-contract law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Suits for violation of contracts between an employer and a labor organization representing employees ... may be brought in any district court of the United States having jurisdiction of the parties....”
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.