Citation network
Goodyear Atomic Corp. Vs. Miller
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 23, 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
-
U.S. 174 (1988) U.S. Supreme Court Goodyear Atomic Corp. v. MillerSearch
-
U.S. 174 (1988) Goodyear Atomic Corp. v. MillerSearch
-
the contention that such application violated the Supremacy Clause of the Federal Constitution. Cf. Japan Line, Ltd. v. CountySearch
-
utilized in Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. CohnSearch
-
authorization for such regulation. Hancock v. TrainSearch
-
regulation. A divided Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. State ex rel. Miller v. OhioSearch
-
n, 26 Ohio St.3d 110, 497 N.E.2d 76 (1986) (per curiam). Relying on the federal preemption analysis of Silkwood v. Kerr-McGeeSearch
-
over this case, we must independently determine as a threshold matter that we have jurisdiction. See Brown Shoe Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Japan Line, Ltd. v. CountySearch
-
s claim that his injury was caused by a failure to comply with a state safety regulation. In Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. CohnSearch
-
to the question of finality, Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. CohnSearch
-
authorization for such regulation. EPA v. StateSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Hancock v. TrainSearch
-
Mayo v. UnitedSearch
-
We believe this question was answered in Hancock v. TrainSearch
-
Id. at 426 U. S. 179 , quoting Mayo v. UnitedSearch
-
presume that Congress is knowledgeable about existing law pertinent to the legislation it enacts. See Director, OWCP v. PeriniSearch
-
Cf. Silkwood v. Kerr-McGeeSearch
-
on whether Congress has taken affirmative action to preempt the state regulation in question. See Hillsborough County v. AutomatedSearch
-
hand, because the Supremacy Clause immunizes the activities of the Federal Government from state interference, Mayo v. UnitedSearch
-
permit, the central issue presented was the power of the State to enforce its emissions regulations. See Hancock v. TrainSearch
-
requirements, and substituted the additional percentage award in the event of such a failure. State ex rel. Bailey v. KriseSearch
-
JUSTICE WHITE, with whom JUSTICE O'CONNOR joins, dissenting. The Court's seminal decision in McCulloch v. MarylandSearch
-
that it finds such impositions to be consistent with the proper pursuit of its powers under federal law. Hancock v. TrainSearch
-
and on its ability to achieve the objectives of federal law and policy for which it has been created. Perez v. CampbellSearch
-
laws may not be applied at places that lie within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal Government. Murray v. GerrickSearch
-
award in any given instance may be small. In Ohio v. ThomasSearch
-
and rules have been held not to activate the extra money penalty afforded by state law. See, e.g., State ex rel. Ish v. IndustrialSearch
-
Roberts v. IndustrialSearch
-
Trydle v. IndustrialSearch
-
Holdosh v. IndustrialSearch
-
Comm'n, 149 Ohio St. 179, 181-182, 78 N.E.2d 165, 166 (1948). See also State ex rel. Rae v. IndustrialSearch
-
Jack Conie & Sons Corp. v. IndustrialSearch
-
how to comply with the specific requirement. State ex rel. Fast & Co. v. IndustrialSearch
-
approving such state regulation that we have required in past cases. Kern-Limerick, Inc. v. ScurlockSearch
-
EPA v. StateSearch
-
blessing. Section 290 was enacted in response to the Court's decision in Murray v. GerrickSearch
-
Government, must be treated as a federal instrumentality for the purpose of applying the Supremacy Clause. Hancock v. TrainSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Goodyear Atomic Corp. v. MillerSearch
-
the Supremacy Clause of the Federal Constitution. Cf. Japan Line, Ltd. v. CountySearch
-
Miller v. OhioSearch
-
of Silkwood v. Kerr-McGeeSearch
-
See Brown Shoe Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
In Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. CohnSearch
-
See Director, OWCP v. PeriniSearch
-
See Hillsborough County v. AutomatedSearch
-
See Hancock v. TrainSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial