Legal Opinion
McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided May 16, 1988No. 86-1520PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court 1
486 U.S. 128 (1988)
McLAUGHLIN, SECRETARY OF LABOR
v.
RICHLAND SHOE CO.
No. 86-1520.
Supreme Court of United States.
Argued February 24, 1988
Decided May 16, 1988
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Deputy Solicitor General Ayer argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs were Solicitor General Fried, Richard G. Taranto, George R. Salem, Allen H. Feldman, and Mary-Helen Mautner.
Leon Ehrlich argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent.[*]
2Opinion of the Court · StevensJustice Stevens
The question presented concerns the meaning of the word "willful" as used in the statute of limitations applicable…
Also in this document: Dissent.
3Cases cited28 opinions
- Screws v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. ThurstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Lorillard v. PonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Spies v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by3 opinions
- Danny Flores v. City of San GabrielCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Carlino v. CHG Medical Staffing, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2020
- Danny Flores v. City of San GabrielCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016