Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. v. Norris

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that strictly factual questions about an employer’s conduct do not require interpretation of a term of a CBA
• confirming that “minor disputes” subject to RLA arbitration are those that involve duties and rights created or defined by the CBA
• denying preemption where the only source of the right respondent asserts is state tort law
• 45 U.S.C. § 151 did not preempt state law causes of action because statutory claim involved rights independent of collective bargaining claims
• “[T]he existence of a potential CBA-based remedy d[oes] not deprive an employee of independent remedies available under state law.”
• “[A] state-law cause of action is not pre-empted by the RLA if it involves rights and obligations that exist independent of the CBA.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).