FREIGHTLINER CORP. ET AL.

v.

MYRICK ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Freightliner Corp. v. Myrick, 514 U.S. 280 (U.S. 1995)
  …), the state-law tort claims were not expressly pre-empted. The Court of Appeals rejected petitioners’ alternative argument that the claims were pre-empted due to a conflict between state law and the federal regulatory scheme. We granted certiorari, 513 U. S. 922 (1994). We now affirm. II In 1966, Congress enacted the Safety Act “to reduce traffic accidents and deaths and injuries to persons resulting from traffic accidents.” 15 U. S. C. § 1381. The Act requires the Secretary of Transportation to establis…
• Saenz v. ROE, 526 U.S. 489 (U.S. 1999)
  …iled to explain why the entire burden of the saving should be imposed on new residents. The Court of Appeals summarily [*495] affirmed for the reasons stated by the District Judge. Green v. Anderson, 26 F. 3d 95 (CA9 1994). petition for certiorari. 513 U. S. 922 (1994). We were, however, unable to reach the merits because the Secretary’s approval of § 11450.03 had been invalidated in a separate proceeding,3 and the State had acknowledged that the Act would not be implemented without further action by the Se…
• Doyle v. Volkswagenwerk Aktiengelellschaft, 114 F.3d 1134 (11th Cir. 1997)
  …t a time after the district court’s decision, this Circuit held that standards promulgated under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act do not preempt common law claims. Myrick v. Freuhauf Carp., 13 F. 3d 1516 (11th Cir.), cert. granted, 513 U.S. 922, 115 S.Ct. 306, 130 L.Ed.2d 218 (1994). The Supreme Court affirmed this Circuit’s decision. Freightliner Corp. v. Myrick, 514 U.S. 280, 115 S.Ct. 1483, 131 L.Ed.2d 385 (1995). On April 24,1996, we certified to the Georgia Supreme Court a question…