LOCKHEED CORP. ET AL.

v.

SPINK

Citator

Cited By

• Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr et vir, 518 U.S. 470 (U.S. 1996)
  …hrs filed a cross-petition seeking review of the judgment insofar as it upheld the pre-emption defense. Because the Courts of Appeals are divided over the extent to which state common-law claims are pre-empted by the MDA,6 we granted both petitions. 516 U. S. 1087 (1996). Ill As in Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., 505 U. S. 504 (1992), we are presented with the task of interpreting a statutory provision that expressly pre-empts state law. While the pre-emptive language of § 360k(a) means that we need not g…
• Smiley v. Citibank (south Dakota), 517 U.S. 735 (U.S. 1996)
  …firmed its dismissal of the complaint, 26 Cal. App. 4th 1767, 32 Cal. Rptr. 2d 562 (1994). The Supreme Court of California granted review and affirmed, two [*739] justices dissenting. 11 Cal. 4th 138, 900 P. 2d 690 (1995). We granted certiorari. 516 U. S. 1087 (1996). II In light of the two dissents from the opinion of the Supreme Court of California, see 11 Cal. 4th, at 165, 177, 900 P. 2d, at 708, 716 (Arabian, J., dissenting, and George, J., dissenting), and in light of the opinion of the Supreme Cou…
• Lockheed Corp. v. Spink, 517 U.S. 882 (U.S. 1996)
  …iolated the OBRA amendments by refusing to include Spink’s service years prior to 1988 in determining his benefits. In so holding, the court found that the OBRA amendments apply retroactively. See id., at 620, n. 1. We issued a writ of certio-rari, 516 U. S. 1087 (1996), and now reverse. HH I — I Nothing m ERISA requires employers to establish employee benefits plans. Nor does ERISA mandate what kind of benefits employers must provide if they choose to have such a plan. Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 463 U…