green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
5.1 score
“the certified appropriate unit must be in and of itself appropriate apart from extent of employees organization.”
Treatment trajectory · 1965 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1965
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Local 1325, Retail Clerks International Association, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, Adams Drug Company, Inc., Intervenor. National Labor Relations Board v. Adams Drug Company, Inc.
the certified appropriate unit must be in and of itself appropriate apart from extent of employees organization.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Local 1325, Retail Clerks International Ass'n v. National Labor Relations Board
the certified appropriate unit must be in and of itself appropriate apart from extent of employee organization.
discussed
Cited "see"
Adams v. United States
Corp. v. United States, 26 Cl.Ct. 1144, 1149 (1992) (citing Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 , 104 S.Ct. 2778 , 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984)); see Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1,16 , 85 S.Ct. 792, 801 , 13 L.Ed.2d 616 , reh’g denied, 380 U.S. 989 , 85 S.Ct. 1325 , 14 L.Ed.2d 283 (1965).
cited
Cited "see"
Delaware Division of Health & Social Services v. United States Department of Health & Human Services
See Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1 , 85 S.Ct. 792 , 13 L.Ed.2d 616 reh. den. 380 U.S. 989 , 85 S.Ct. 1325 , 14 L.Ed.2d 283 (1965).
cited
Cited "see"
Timken Co. v. Vaughan
See Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1 , 85 S.Ct. 792 ,13 L.Ed.2d *1190 616, reh. den. 380 U.S. 989 , 85 S.Ct. 1325 , 14 L.Ed.2d 283 (1965); Lawson Milk Co. v. Freeman, 358 F.2d 647 (6th Cir. 1966).
discussed
Cited "see"
Joseph B. Crawford v. The United States. Rocco A. Trecosta v. The United States. Gail M. Aanenson v. The United States. Harry W. Aho v. The United States. Helen Phyllis Abrahamsen v. The United States. Esther Katrina Barnes v. The United States. Edna T. Ackal v. The United States.
Accord, Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1, 16 , 85 S.Ct. 792 , 13 L.Ed.2d 616 (1965), rehearing denied, 380 U.S. 989 , 85 S.Ct. 1325 , 14 L.Ed.2d 283 (1965); Power Reactor Development Co. v. International Union of Electrical Radio & Machine Workers, 367 U.S. 396, 408 , 81 S.Ct. 1529 , 6 L.Ed.2d 924 (1961).
discussed
Cited "see"
National Labor Relations Board v. Sun Drug Co., Inc.
N.L.R.B. v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., 380 U.S. 438, 441, 443 , 85 S.Ct. 1061 , 13 L.Ed.2d 951 (1965); see Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. N.L.R.B., 328 F.2d 820, 822 (3d Cir. 1964), vacated on other grounds, 380 U.S. 523 , 85 S.Ct. 1325 , 14 L.Ed.2d 265 (1965).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
At&t Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, MCI Telecommunications Corporation, Intervenors
See also Udall v. Tollman, 380 U.S. 1, 16-17 , 85 S.Ct. 792, 801-02 , 13 L.Ed.2d 616 , reh’g denied, 380 U.S. 989 , 85 S.Ct. 1325 , 14 L.Ed.2d 283 (1965).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Old Ben Coal Corporation v. Interior Board Of Mine Operations Appeals
See, e. g., Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1, 16 , 85 S.Ct. 792 , 13 L.Ed.2d 616 (1965), reh. denied, 380 U.S. 989 , 85 S.Ct. 1325 , 14 L.Ed.2d 283 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Old Ben Coal Corp. v. Interior Board of Mine Operations Appeals
See, e. g., Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1, 16 , 85 S.Ct. 792 , 13 L.Ed.2d 616 (1965), reh. denied, 380 U.S. 989 , 85 S.Ct. 1325 , 14 L.Ed.2d 283 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Peter J. Brennan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. The Kroger Company, a Corporation
See, e. g., Udall v. Tailman, 380 U.S. 1, 16 , 85 S.Ct. 792 , 13 L.Ed.2d 616 (1965), reh. denied, 380 U.S. 989 , 85 S.Ct. 1325 , 14 L.Ed.2d 283 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Tyler
Defendant’s argument [that his co-defendants may testify on their own behalf, forcing him to testify so as to avoid adverse inferences by the jury in violation of his privilege against self-incrimination], if sustained, would eliminate joinder of any criminal defendants and would render the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure a nullity.” Finally, Mr. Tyler’s wish for a speedy trial and the possibility that he may decide to waive a jury trial do not provide a sufficient basis for severance. “[The] Constitution neither confers nor recognizes a right of criminal defendants to have their c…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Udall, Secretary of the Interior
v.
Tallman
v.
Tallman
No. 34.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 26, 1965.
ante, p. 1.
Petition for rehearing denied.
Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Harlan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.