Robbins v. Winters Creek Canal Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that because “it is difficult to treat these programs as a guise for economic regulation” the programs were “sufficiently safety-oriented to survive pre- emption under § 14501(c)
• rejecting the argument that the safety exception “extends only to safety regulation of the mechanical components of motor vehicles . . . and not to municipal management of vehicular accidents”
• construing the safety exception as “encompass[ing] the authority to enact safety regulations with respect to motor vehicle accidents and break-downs” because such a construction “fully comports with Congress’ purpose to leave intact state and local safety regulatory authority”
• \[T]he broad `related to' language of section 14501(c)(1) generally preempts economic regulation by the states within the field of intrastate towing.\
• “[T]he broad ‘related to’ language of section 14501(c)(1) generally preempts economic regulation by the states within the field of intrastate towing.”
• tow truck driver criminal history requirements

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).