Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 49 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 Mut. Pharm. Co. v. Bartlett.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mut. Pharm. Co. v. Bartlett Anchor | green | “an actor seeking to satisfy both his federal- and state-law obligations is not required to cease acting altogether in order to avoid liability.” | 18 |
| 2 | Alabama Assn. of Realtors v. Department of Health and Human Servs. | green | “enact exceedingly clear language if it wishes to significantly alter the balance between federal and state power,” | 11 |
| 3 | Sprietsma v. Mercury Marine | green | “the terms 'law' and 'regulation' used together in the pre-emption clause indicate that congress pre-empted only positive enactments. if 'law' were read broadly so as to include the common law, it might also be interpreted to include regulations, which would render the express re…” | 9 |
| 4 | Union Pacific Railroad v. Chicago Transit Authority | green | “even if the property was not being used and union pacific had no immediate plans to use this property, a taking of this property would still prevent union pacific from using it for railroad transportation in the future” | 5 |
| 5 | Adrian & Blissfield Railroad v. Village of Blissfield | green | “unreasonably burdensome and did not discriminate against railroads” | 3 |
| 6 | Tubbs v. Surface Transportation Board | green | “subject construction of elevated railroad embankments to state regulation . . . via negligence” | 3 |
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.