Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Goodman v. Lukens Steel Co.

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided June 19, 1987No. 85-1626Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Justice Powell,

with whom Justice Scalia joins, and with whom Justice O’Connor joins as to Parts I through IV, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I concur in the Court’s holding that the state statute of limitations for personal injury actions should apply to claims arising under 42 U. S. C. § 1981. I also agree that the Court’s ruling on the statute of limitations question should *681apply to the parties in this case and therefore join Part I of the Court’s opinion. I dissent, however, from Part II of the Court’s opinion, that affirms the judgment against the Unions for violating § 1981…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Griggs v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
  5. Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API