Stephen D. Atwater v. The National Football League

How courts have described this case

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

• holding plaintiffs’ negligence claim preempted because employer allegedly breached duties that “arose directly from the CBA”
• deferring to the district court’s judgment that the non-moving party’s Statement of Material Facts satisfied the local rule
• deferring to the district court’s judgment that the non-moving party’s Statement of Material Facts satisfied the local rule
• \The Supreme Court has applied the complete preemption doctrine to only three federal statutes\
• “[I]n determining whether § 301 preempts a state-law cause of action ... consider whether the claim arises from a CBA ... or whether ‘the resolution of [the] state-law claim depends upon the meaning of a collective-bargaining agreement.”
• negligence claim preempted because duties underlying claim arose directly from CBA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).