Legal Opinion · Dissent

G. & T. Terminal Packaging Co., Inc. And Anthony Spinale v. Consolidated Rail Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided October 22, 1987No. 86-5897Published

1DissentAldisert, Circuit Judge

What divides this court is a straightforward disagreement. We are not fencing with glancing blows. Our divergent views meet a single controlling issue head on: Does federal law preempt state common law claims against rail carriers for discriminatory conduct practiced during the period in which the Interstate Commerce Commission, pursuant to the Staggers Rail Act of 1980, has exempted relevant rail traffic from regulation? The majority says common law remedies are preempted in these circumstances. I say they are not. Accordingly, I dissent and would reverse the judgment- of the district court.

I

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm'n v. FCCSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Nader v. Allegheny Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Wardair Canada Inc. v. Florida Department of RevenueSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  5. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp. v. State Oil & Gas BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

5 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