Citation network
Boyle Vs. United Technologies Corp.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 27, 1988
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
-
Boyle v. UnitedSearch
-
Technologies Corp. - 487 U.S. 500 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court Boyle v. UnitedSearch
-
Technologies Corp., 487 U.S. 500 (1988) Boyle v. UnitedSearch
-
a significant Page 487 U. S. 501 conflict is present, the Court of Appeals relied on the rationale of Feres v. UnitedSearch
-
which the court had recognized the same day in Tozer v. LTVSearch
-
to find federal preemption of state law in the absence of either a clear statutory prescription, see, e.g., Jones v. RathSearch
-
Rice v. SantaSearch
-
S. 230 (1947), or a direct conflict between federal and state law, see, e.g., Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. PaulSearch
-
Texas Industries, Inc. v. RadcliffSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
United States v. KimbellSearch
-
Banco Nacional v. SabbatinoSearch
-
Clearfield Trust Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
D'Oench, Duhme & Co. v. FDICSearch
-
and rights of the United States under its contracts are governed exclusively by federal law. See, e.g., United States v. LittleSearch
-
Priebe & Sons, Inc. v. UnitedSearch
-
National Metropolitan Bank v. UnitedSearch
-
allow design defect suits only by the purchaser and those in privity with the seller. See General Bronze Corp. v. KostopulosSearch
-
duty. We have held in many contexts that the scope of that liability is controlled by federal law. See, e.g., Westfall v. ErwinSearch
-
Yaselli v. GoffSearch
-
Bank of America Nat. Trust & Sav. Assn. v. ParnellSearch
-
U. S. 29 , 352 U. S. 33 (1956), federal law does not govern. Thus, for example, in Miree v. DeKalbSearch
-
See also Wallis v. PanSearch
-
Claims Act (FTCA) does not cover injuries to Armed Services personnel in the course of military service. See Feres v. UnitedSearch
-
Tozer, 792 F.2d at 408. Other courts upholding the defense have embraced similar reasoning. See, e.g., Bynum v. FMCSearch
-
McKay v. RockwellSearch
-
of these judgments, see United States v. VarigSearch
-
scope of displacement adopted by the Fourth Circuit here, which is also that adopted by the Ninth Circuit, see McKay v. RockwellSearch
-
of the Government contractor defense, urged upon us by petitioner, which was adopted by the Eleventh Circuit in Shaw v. GrummanSearch
-
jury instructions that expressed the defense differently, and in a fashion that would support a verdict. See St. Louis v. PraprotnikSearch
-
Ebker v. TanSearch
-
United States v. LittleSearch
-
United States v. KimbellSearch
-
Even before our landmark decision in Clearfield Trust Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
we would be duty-bound to implement their will, whether or not we approved. United States v. JohnsonSearch
-
reverse the Court of Appeals and reinstate petitioner's jury award. I Before our decision in Erie R. Co. v. TompkinsSearch
-
the state law that would ordinarily govern with their own rules of federal common law. See, e.g., United States v. StandardSearch
-
of diversity jurisdiction to federal courts is itself authority to fashion rules of substantive law. See United States v. LittleSearch
-
Puerto Rico Dept. of Consumer Affairs v. IslaSearch
-
instances. Wheeldin v. WheelerSearch
-
Milwaukee v. IllinoisSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Boyle v. UnitedSearch
-
of Feres v. UnitedSearch
-
Tozer v. LTVSearch
-
Jones v. RathSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial