English v. General Electric Co.

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 regulatory effect of petitioner's state common-law claims was \neither direct nor substantial enough\ to place them within the preempted field
• holding that the regulatory effect of petitioner’s state common-law claims was “neither direct nor substantial enough” to place them within the preempted field
• holding that nuclear fuel production employee’s state law claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress was not preempted by the Energy Reorganization Act
• holding that conflict preemption is found when “state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress”
• holding that conflict preemption is found when “state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress”
• noting that field pre-emption rests on an inference of congressional intent to exclude state regulation and that it \may be understood as a species of conflict pre-emption\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).