Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Supreme Court· 6/9/1987

Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams

Citations

  • 482 U.S. 386
  • 107 S. Ct. 2425
  • 96 L. Ed. 2d 318
  • 1987 U.S. LEXIS 2607
  • 55 U.S.L.W. 4804
  • 2 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 193
  • 125 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2521

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that “the fact that ARCO’s complaint ma[de] repeated references to” federal law was insufficient to confer jurisdiction
  • holding that ordinarily a case may not be removed on the basis of a federal defense unless the \complete preemption doctrine\ applies
  • holding that union members’ suit based on contract that was independent of a collective bargaining agreement was not preempted and not removable
  • holding that a defendant cannot subject a state law claim to federal preemption by raising a defense that requires analysis of a CBA
  • holding that, under the LMRA, a claim resting on interpretation of an individual employment contract does not have the same preemptive effect as one requiring interpretation of the CBA
  • holding that federal jurisdiction exists when a federal question is presented on the face of the complaint

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brennan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

2,378 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.