Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 900 F.2d 973 - Tucker v. Bieber

Tucker v. Bieber’s Empirical Analysis

900 F.2d 973 · 1990

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
March 2013
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently March 2013

5 federal appellate · 2 district ·

90199020002010decided

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. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 29 U.S.C. § 411

Relies on MacArthur Co. v. Johns-Manville Corp. · Finnegan v. Leu · Pinney Dock & Transport Co. v. Penn Central Corp. · Republic of Ghana v. Trefalcon Corp. · United Steelworkers of America v. Sadlowski

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

  1. “does not restrict the freedom of an elected union leader to choose a staff whose views are compatible with his own. Indeed, neither the language nor the legislative history of the [LMRDA] suggest that it was intended even to address the issue of union patronage. To the contrary, the [LMRDA’s] overriding objective was to ensure that unions would be democratically governed, and responsive to the will of the union membership as expressed in open, periodic elections. [Citations omitted]. Far from being inconsistent with this purpose, the ability of an elected union president to select his own administrators is an integral part of ensuring a union administration’s responsiveness to the mandate of the union election.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Title I [of the LMRDA] protects rank and file union members who speak out against union leaders or who seek elective union offices.”
    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.