Citation network
Brown Vs. Gsa
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 01, 1976
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
-
U.S. 820 (1976) U.S. Supreme Court Brown v. GSASearch
-
U.S. 820 (1976) Brown v. GSASearch
-
c) was designed merely to supplement other putative judicial remedies. Johnson v. RailwaySearch
-
c) A precisely drawn, detailed statute preempts more general remedies. Preiser v. RodriguezSearch
-
b). Although federal employment discrimination clearly violated both the Constitution, Bolling v. SharpeSearch
-
employment discrimination was available at the time that Congress was considering the 1972 Act. For example, in Gnotta v. UnitedSearch
-
sought would expend itself on the public treasury or domain, or interfere with the public administration,' Land v. DollarSearch
-
would be Page 425 U. S. 827 'to restrain the Government from acting, or to compel it to act,' Larson v. DomesticSearch
-
Blaze v. MoonSearch
-
thorough remedial scheme to be circumvented by artful pleading. The petitioner relies upon our decision in Johnson v. RailwaySearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U.S. at 421 U. S. 459 , quoting Alexander v. Gardner-DenverSearch
-
U.S. at 421 U. S. 459 , quoting H.R.Rep. No. 92-238, p. 19 (1971). See also Jones v. AlfredSearch
-
of contexts, the Court has held that a precisely drawn, detailed statute preempts more general remedies. In Preiser v. RodriguezSearch
-
employees have claimed the right to proceed under facially applicable tort recovery statutes. E.g., United States v. DemkoSearch
-
Patterson v. UnitedSearch
-
Johansen v. UnitedSearch
-
tailored employee compensation scheme preempts the more general tort recovery statutes. See also Forco Glass Co. v. TransmirraSearch
-
Stonite Products Co. v. MelvinSearch
-
Bolling v. SharpeSearch
-
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. SawyerSearch
-
DeLong v. HamptonSearch
-
the question of exclusivity in the same way at both times. As the legislative history discussed in Chandler v. RoudebushSearch
-
should enjoy parallel rights. Page 425 U. S. 837 The reasoning which governed the decisions in Johnson v. RailwaySearch
-
Express Agency, 421 U. S. 454 , and Alexander v. Gardner-DenverSearch
-
Alexander v. Gardner-DenverSearch
-
Co., 415 U. S. 36 , and Johnson v. RailwaySearch
-
In Alexander v. Gardner-DenverSearch
-
Congress indicated that it considered the policy against discrimination to be of the 'highest priority.' Newman v. PiggieSearch
-
In Johnson v. RailwaySearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Brown v. GSASearch
-
Johnson v. RailwaySearch
-
the Constitution, Bolling v. SharpeSearch
-
Gnotta v. UnitedSearch
-
Larson v. DomesticSearch
-
Blaze v. MoonSearch
-
Jones v. AlfredSearch
-
In Preiser v. RodriguezSearch
-
E.g., United States v. DemkoSearch
-
Forco Glass Co. v. TransmirraSearch
-
DeLong v. HamptonSearch
-
and Alexander v. Gardner-DenverSearch
-
and Johnson v. RailwaySearch
-
Newman v. PiggieSearch
-
United States v. FisherSearch
-
Land v. DollarSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial