Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Lincoln Union Vs. Northwestern Co.

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 03, 1949

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

57 entries 6 linked 51 unlinked
Show
  1. East New York Savings Bank Vs. Hahn US Supreme Court · Nov 05, 1945
  2. Bayside Fish Flour Co. Vs. Gentry US Supreme Court · Mar 02, 1936
  3. Sage Vs. Hampe US Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1914
  4. Coppage Vs. Kansas US Supreme Court · Jan 25, 1915
  5. Olsen Vs. Nebraska US Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1941
    Relied / Followed
  6. West Coast Hotel Co. Vs. Parrish US Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1937
    Distinguished
  7. Lincoln Union v. Northwestern
    Search
  8. Co. - 335 U.S. 525 (1949) U.S. Supreme Court Lincoln Union v. Northwestern
    Search
  9. Co., 335 U.S. 525 (1949) Lincoln Federal Labor Union v. Northwestern
    Search
  10. Cf. Wallace Corporation v. Labor
    Search
  11. this contention is without merit is now too clearly established to require discussion. See Home Bldg. & Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell
    Search
  12. U. S. 398 , 290 U. S. 436 -439, and cases Page 335 U. S. 532 there cited. And also Veix v. Sixth
    Search
  13. these state laws protect the employment opportunities of members of independent unions. See Wallace Corporation v. Labor
    Search
  14. power to ban contracts which if performed would bring about the prohibited discrimination. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. McGuire
    Search
  15. employer discrimination are valid, it follows that the contract prohibition also is valid. Bayside Fish Flour Co. v. Gentry
    Search
  16. U. S. 422 , 297 U. S. 427 . And see Sage v. Hampe
    Search
  17. employer discrimination against union members and to outlaw yellow dog contracts. In 1907, this Court, in Adair v. United
    Search
  18. and could therefore do so through use of yellow dog contracts. The chief reliance for this holding was Lochner v. New
    Search
  19. for work in bakeries. This Court had found support for its Lochner holding in what had been said in Allgeyer v. Louisiana
    Search
  20. Adair and Lochner cases. In 1914, this Court reaffirmed the principles of the Adair case in Coppage v. Kansas
    Search
  21. hours in employment, laws fixing prices, and laws regulating business activities. See cases cited in Olsen v. Nebraska
    Search
  22. U. S. 236 , 313 U. S. 244 -246, and Osborn v. Ozlin
    Search
  23. U. S. 53 , 310 U. S. 66 -67. And the same constitutional philosophy was faithfully adhered to in Adams v. Tanner
    Search
  24. U. S. 590 , a case strongly pressed upon us by appellants. In Adams v. Tanner
    Search
  25. and upon, this conclusion, held that the state was without power to proscribe them. Our holding and opinion in Olsen v. Nebraska
    Search
  26. supra, clearly undermined Adams v. Tanner
    Search
  27. Appellants also rely heavily on certain language used in this Court's opinion in Wolff Packing Co. v. Court
    Search
  28. Wolff Packing Co. v. Industrial
    Search
  29. This latter distinction was rejected in Nebbia v. New
    Search
  30. and Olsen cases. That wages and hours can be fixed by law is no longer doubted since West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish
    Search
  31. Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor
    Search
  32. laws do not run afoul of some specific federal constitutional prohibition or of some valid federal law. See Nebbia v. New
    Search
  33. York, supra, at 291 U. S. 523 -524, and West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish
    Search
  34. Together with No. 34, Whitaker et al. v. North
    Search
  35. State v. Whitaker
    Search
  36. Lincoln Federal Labor Union No.19129 v. Northwestern
    Search
  37. Iron & Metal Co., 149 Neb. 507, 31 N.W.2d 477. See also American Federation of Labor v. American
    Search
  38. Amendment makes the prohibitions and guarantees of the First Amendment applicable to state action. See West Virginia v. Barnette
    Search
  39. U.S. Supreme Court Lincoln Union v. Northwestern
    Search
  40. Lincoln Federal Labor Union v. Northwestern
    Search
  41. See Home Bldg. & Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell
    Search
  42. Veix v. Sixth
    Search
  43. See Wallace Corporation v. Labor
    Search
  44. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. McGuire
    Search
  45. Adair v. United
    Search
  46. Lochner v. New
    Search
  47. Allgeyer v. Louisiana
    Search
  48. and Osborn v. Ozlin
    Search
  49. Adams v. Tanner
    Search
  50. In Adams v. Tanner
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial