SEALS

v.

UNITED STATES ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Wasyl, Inc. v. First Boston Corp., 813 F.2d 1579 (9th Cir. 1987)
  …on of the Act. “State law should be preempted only to the extent necessary to protect the achievement of the aims of the [federal act in question.]” Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Hammond, 726 F. 2d 483, 496 (9th Cir.1984) (citations omitted), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1140, 105 S.Ct. 2686, 86 L.Ed.2d 703 (1985). California, the parties’ choice of law, does define “agreement” in its arbitration statutes (as in the context of arbitrating a controversy pursuant to an “agreement”). Cal.Civ.Proc.Code § 1280(a) (West 1982)…
• Scurlock v. City OF Lynn Haven, 858 F.2d 1521 (11th Cir. 1988)
  …Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Ware, 414 [*1524] U.S. 117, 127, 94 S.Ct. 383, 389, 38 L.Ed.2d 348 (1973)); see also Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Hammond, 726 F. 2d 483, 488, 496-97 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied sub nom. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Sheffield, 471 U.S. 1140, 105 S.Ct. 2686, 86 L.Ed.2d 703 (1985). In this case Congress has expressly defined the preemptive reach of the Act: Whenever a Federal [mobile] home construction and safety standard established under this chapter is in effect, no State or politic…
• Pac. Merch. Shipping Ass'n v. Aubry, 918 F.2d 1409 (9th Cir. 1990)
  …ctually conflicts with federal law. Id. at 280-81, 107 S.Ct. at 689-90; see Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp., 464 U.S. 238, 248, 104 S.Ct. 615, 621, 78 L.Ed.2d 443 (1984); Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Hammond, 726 F. 2d 483, 486 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1140, 105 S.Ct. 2686, 86 L.Ed.2d 703 (1985). States, however, possess broad authority under their police powers to regulate the employment relationship to protect resident workers. De Canas v. Bica, 424 [*1416] U.S. 351, 356, 96 S.Ct. 933, 936, 47 L.Ed.…

  ← 1 / 2 →