Tiny J. Willis v. Reynolds Metals Company

How courts have described this case

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

• finding preemption where the “alleged wrong by [employer] . . . directly dealt with its right pursuant to a [CBA] to conduct investigations into possible harassment . . . and the associated right to confront the suspected employee”
• plaintiffs claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress based on her supervisor’s investigation of plaintiffs suspected role in harassing another employee held to be preempted by Section 301
• \[T]he alleged wrong by Reynolds in the instant case directly dealt with its right pursuant to a collective bar- gaining agreement to conduct investigations . . . and the associated right to confront the suspected employee.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).