Cortez v. MTD Products, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• “there is no apparent difference, for purposes of measuring preemptive reach, between a ‘requirement or prohibition . . . based on State law,’ on the one hand, and ... a ‘standard or regulation’ established by a State”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Churchill Village, L.L.C. v. General Electric Co.
  N.D. California· 2000-05-10· cited 38×
• Ryan v. Brunswick Corp.
  Michigan Supreme Court· 1997-01-28· cited 29×
• Colon Ex Rel. Molina v. Bic USA, Inc.
  S.D. New York· 2000-12-19· cited 12×
• Samica Enterprises, LLC v. Mail Boxes Etc. USA, Inc.
  C.D. California· 2008-12-22· cited 7×
• Frazier v. Heckingers
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2000-05-23· cited 1×

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon
  Supreme Court· 1959-04-20· cited 2,980×
• Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.
  Supreme Court· 1947-05-05· cited 2,636×
• Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1992-06-24· cited 2,631×
• Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1992-06-01· cited 1,837×
• CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Easterwood
  Supreme Court· 1993-04-21· cited 1,080×
• Freightliner Corp. v. Myrick
  Supreme Court· 1995-04-18· cited 675×
• Unnamed case
  Ninth Circuit· 1982-04-15· cited 194×
• Arizona v. Ash Grove Cement Co.
  Supreme Court· 1983-02-22· cited 31×
• Barbara Mitchell and Gregory Mitchell v. Collagen Corporation
  Seventh Circuit· 1995-11-22· cited 27×
• Carstensen v. Brunswick Corp.
  Supreme Court· 1995-10-02· cited 27×
• Joan Carstensen v. Brunswick Corporation, Mercury Marine Corporation, and Sea Ray Boats, Inc.
  Eighth Circuit· 1995-03-03· cited 25×
• Mateo v. M/S KISO
  N.D. California· 1992-03-09· cited 12×
• prod.liab.rep. (Cch) P 14,451 Brian Moe Thomas Moe Saundra Moe v. Mtd Products, Inc.
  Eighth Circuit· 1995-12-27· cited 8×