In the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. et al., 1946, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of labor unions' right to advise their members on legal matters related to workplace injuries. The case arose when a railroad company sued the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen for allegedly interfering with its business by advising injured workers to seek specific lawyers for compensation claims under Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA). The court held that such advice was not an unlawful practice but rather part and parcel of what trade unions do - protecting their members' interests. This ruling significantly affirmed labor union rights and set a precedent allowing them to recommend attorneys without violating any laws or regulations.

In the dissenting opinion for Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., Justice Frankfurter argued that the majority's decision to allow union representatives to solicit lawsuits on behalf of injured workers was a mistake. He believed it would lead to an increase in litigation, which he saw as detrimental to both unions and employers. Furthermore, he contended that such solicitation could potentially undermine the impartiality of legal proceedings by encouraging frivolous or unnecessary suits. He also expressed concern about potential conflicts of interest between union officials and their members, arguing that this arrangement might incentivize officials to prioritize their own interests over those of the workers they represent.