Martin Marietta Corporation, Aero & Naval Systems v. Maryland Commission on Human Relations

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “the state law tort of retaliatory discharge creates rights independent of those provided under the CBAs”
• de novo review of question whether conditions for Younger abstention are met, and abuse of discretion review of district court’s decision
• “Thus, we need not reach the issue of whether or not a facially conclusive or readily apparent claim of preemption would bar abstention.”
• state law handicap discrimination and retaliation claims were not preempted by § 301 of the LMRA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).