Healy v. Metropolitan Pier & Exposition Authority

How courts have described this case

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

• holding Labor Management Relations Act preempted employees’ tortious-interference claims against third party because resolution of the claims required interpretation of the relevant CBA
• explaining that Section 301 [of the Labor- Management Relations Act] preempts not only claims “founded directly’ on the [CBA], but also state law claims that indirectly implicate a [CBA].”
• finding the LMRA preempted a claim under Illinois law for tortious interference with contract that includes similar elements
• affirming district court’s dismissal of tortious interference claim because it was preempted by the LMRA
• affirming district court’s dismissal of tortious interference claim because it was preempted by the LMRA
• “However, we deem a dismissal of preempted state law claims a 12(b)(6) dismissal for failure to state a claim, a dismissal on the merits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).