How cited: State v. CSX Transp., Inc. · Go Syfert

State v. CSX Transp., Inc. (2022)

green · 19 citation events across 7 courts. Showing the 5 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Rule Authority · D. Conn.
Co., 267 F.3d 439 , 441 n.2, 443-44 (5th Cir. 2001); State v. CSX Transportation, Inc., 168 Ohio St. 3d 543, 544, 548 (2023); State v. Norfolk S. Ry.
Cited · Ohio Ct. App. · signal: see
See State v. CSX Transp., Inc., 2022-Ohio-2832, ¶ 11 , citing Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, 387 U.S. 299 , 302 (2019).
Cited (see also) · Tex. · signal: see also
Co., 635 F.3d 796, 807 (5th Cir. 2011) (holding Section 10501(b) expressly and completely preempted a state statute regulating trains blocking track crossings because the statute “is a direct attempt to manage [the rail carrier’s] decisions in the economic realm”); Green Mountain R.R. v. Vermont, 404 F.3d 638 , 643 (2d Cir. 2005) (holding Section 10501(b) expressly preempted a state environmental-land-use statute requiring a pre-construction permit for a transloading facilit…
holding Section 10501(b) expressly preempted a state statute regulating trains blocking track crossings because the statute regulates, manages, and governs rail traffic
Cited (see also) · Tex. App. · signal: see also
Co., 635 F.3d 796, 807 (5th Cir. 2011) (holding Section 10501(b) expressly and completely preempted a state statute regulating trains blocking track crossings because the statute “is a direct attempt to manage [the rail carrier’s] decisions in the economic realm”); Green Mountain R.R. v. Vermont, 404 F.3d 638 , 643 (2d Cir. 2005) (holding Section 10501(b) expressly preempted a state environmental-land-use statute requiring a pre-construction permit for a transloading facilit…
holding Section 10501(b) expressly preempted a state statute regulating trains blocking track crossings because the statute regulates, manages, and governs rail traffic
Cited (see also) · Tex. · signal: see also
Co., 635 F.3d 796, 807 (5th Cir. 2011) (holding Section 10501(b) expressly and completely preempted a state statute regulating trains blocking track crossings because the statute “is a direct attempt to manage [the rail carrier’s] decisions in the economic realm”); Green Mountain R.R. v. Vermont, 404 F.3d 638 , 643 (2d Cir. 2005) (holding Section 10501(b) expressly preempted a state environmental-land-use statute requiring a pre-construction permit for a transloading facilit…
holding Section 10501(b) expressly preempted a state statute regulating trains blocking track crossings because the statute regulates, manages, and governs rail traffic