Topic: necessary to protect uniquely federal interests. · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #9078

6 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 40 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Texas Industries, Inc. v. Radcliff Materials, Inc..

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 Texas Industries, Inc. v. Radcliff Materials, Inc. Anchor
scotus · 1981
green “necessary to protect uniquely federal interests.” 14
2 Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala.
scotus · 1957
green “it is not uncommon for federal courts to fashion federal law where federal rights are concerned.” 12
3 United States v. John Christopher Beale
ca9 · 1984
green “whether or not the statement in place was a holding or dictum, the supreme court has clearly directed the lower courts to follow its pronouncement.” 5
4 International Paper Co. v. Ouellette
scotus · 1987
green “the court held that federal legislation now occupied the field, preempting all federal common law.” 4
5 Bunker Hill Company Lead and Zinc Smelter v. Environmental Protection Agency
ca9 · 1981
green “was intended comprehensively to regulate, through guidelines and controls, the complexities of restraining and curtailing modern day air pollution.” 3
6 Reeger v. Mill Service, Inc.
pawd · 1984
green “applies); united states v. kin-buc, inc., 532 f.supp. 699, 702 (d.n.j.1982) (common law of nuisance preempted because” 2

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check