Ann C. Schweiss v. Chrysler Motors Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding OSHA’s “remedial scheme does not pre-empt [plaintiff’s] state law wrongful discharge action”
• stating that “where there are factual questions still to be resolved or we would benefit from having the [d]istrict [c]ourt decide the issue in the first instance,” we may remand the matter to the district court
• remanding to the district court to consider an alternative basis for affirmance because “we would benefit from having the District Court decide the issue ... before we address it”
• explaining that we may decline to address an issue not reached by the district court “where there are factual questions still to be resolved or where we would benefit from having the District Court decide the issue in the first instance”
• explaining why it may be preferable to have a district court address an issue in the first instance
• remanding to the district court to consider an alternative basis because \we would benefit from having the District Court decide the issue ... before we address it\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).