Dayton Hudson Department Store Company Division of Dayton Hudson Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 federal appellate ·

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.

1. “specific evidence ... not only that the unlawful acts occurred, but also that they interfered with the employees' exercise of free choice to such an extent that they materially affected the results of the election.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. National Labor Relations Board v. Wintz Distribution Company · National Labor Relations Board v. Wintz Distribution Company

2. “[W]e rule today that we will no longer probe into the truth or falsity of the parties’ campaign statements, and that we will not set elections aside on the basis of misleading campaign statements. We will, however, intervene in cases where a party has used forged documents which render the voters unable to recognize propaganda for what it is. Thus, we will set an election aside not because of the substance of the representation, but because of the deceptive manner in which it was made, a manner which renders employees unable to evaluate the forgery for what it is.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. National Labor Relations Board v. Hub Plastics, Inc. · Perdue Farms, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

3. “There may be cases where no forgery can be proved, but where the misrepresentation is so pervasive and the deception so artful that employees will be unable to separate truth from untruth and where their right to a free and fair choice will be affected. We agree with the Board that it should not set aside an election on the basis of the substance of representations alone, but only on the deceptive manner in which representations are made.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Mitchellace, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board · Ki Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board