Federal Case

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a medical monitoring claim lacks the jurisdictional requirements of the PAA when there is only future risk of disease but no present physical injury
• explaining that the Act “provide[s] the exclusive means for pursuing claims under” its provisions
• noting that the Act is intended to limit liability for nuclear incidents
• noting that the Act is intended to limit liability for nuclear incidents
• rejecting emotional distress claim without physical injury, despite Washington state law allowing it
• rejecting emotional distress claim without physical injury, despite Washington state law allowing it

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).