HESTER ET UX., INDIVIDUALLY, AND HESTER, AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF HESTER, DECEASED

v.

CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.

Citator

Cited By

• Ingram v. CSX Transp., Inc., 146 F.3d 858 (11th Cir. 1998)
  …inadequate signalization. See Armijo v. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Ry. Co., 87 F. 3d 1188 (10th Cir.1996); Elrod v. Burlington Northern R. Co., 68 F. 3d 241 (8th Cir.1995); Hester v. CSX Transp., Inc., 61 F. 3d 382 (5th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1093, 116 S.Ct. 815, 133 L.Ed.2d 760 (1996). The Eighth Circuit explained that “[f]ederal funding is the touchstone of [FRSA] preemption ... because it indicates that the warning devices have been deemed adequate by federal regulators.” Elrod, 68 F. 3d…
• Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council OF Ariz., Inc., 570 U.S. 1 (U.S. 2013)
  …f a qualification to vote." Reply Brief for State Petitioners 24 (emphasis deleted); see also post, at 2261 - 2262, 2269 - 2270 (opinion of THOMAS, J.); cf. Voting Rights Coalition v. Wilson, 60 F. 3d 1411, 1413, and n. 1 (C.A.9 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1093, 116 S.Ct. 815, 133 L.Ed.2d 759 (1996) ; Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) v. Edgar, 56 F. 3d 791, 793 (C.A.7 1995). We resolve this case on the theory on which it has hitherto been litigated: that citizenship (not regist…
• Norfolk S. Ry. Co. v. Shanklin, 529 U.S. 344 (U.S. 2000)
  …mption under FRSA); Armijo v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R. Co., 87 F. 3d 1188 (CA10 1996) (same); Elrod v. Burlington Northern R. Co., 68 F. 3d 241 (CA81995) [*352] (same); Hester v. CSX Transp., Inc., 61 F. 3d 382 (CA5 1995) (same), cert. denied, 516 U. S. 1093 (1996), with 173 F. 3d 386 (CA6 1999) (ease below); Shots v. CSX Transp., Inc., 38 F. 3d 304 (CA7 1994) (no pre-emption until representative of Federal Government has determined that devices installed are adequate for safety). II We previously add…