Search for: ""Sprietsma v. Mercury Marine" OR "537 U.S. 51"" Results 1 - 10 of 10
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Mar 2008, 6:04 am
Mercury Marine, 537 U.S. 51 (2002), the Coast Guard did not believe that claims relating to a propellor guard should be preempted; the Supreme Court held that they were not.In Freightliner Corp. v. [read post]
19 Dec 2008, 3:04 pm
Mercury Marine, 537 U.S. 51 (2002) to argue that the FDA merely failed to act with respect to suicidality warnings, and that a federal agency's failure to act does not create a federal requirement triggering preemption. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 5:00 am
Mercury Marine, 537 U.S. 51, 65 (2002) (“Congress’ inclusion of an express pre-emption clause does not bar the ordinary working of conflict pre-emption principles that find implied pre-emption”; finding no implied preemption either) (citing Buckman); Medtronic, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Oct 2008, 9:03 am
Mercury Marine, 537 U.S. 51, 64 (2002) (quoting English); American Insurance Ass'n v. [read post]
5 Mar 2009, 12:02 pm
A little more than a year ago, back in February 2008, a majority of the Supreme Court stated, in Riegel v. [read post]
5 Jun 2008, 12:56 pm
Maybe that means that we'll get it right this time.Anyway, as regular readers of this blog know, Wyeth filed its principal merits brief in Wyeth v. [read post]
12 Dec 2007, 2:33 pm
The first wave of defense briefing is now complete in Warner-Lambert v. [read post]