Legal Opinion

Marion Terwilliger and Doris Terwilliger v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., a Foreign Corporation, and James Shelby, Jointly and Severally, M.J. Jorgensen

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided September 26, 1989No. 87-1236PublishedCited by 59 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ENGEL, Chief Judge.

Defendant Greyhound Lines, Inc. (“Greyhound”) appeals the judgment of the district court awarding plaintiff Marion Ter-williger damages following a jury determination that Greyhound committed fraud and misrepresentation under Michigan law against Terwilliger by denying Terwilli-ger’s application for reemployment in 1971. For the reasons stated below, we find that Terwilliger’s state-law claim is preempted by Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185, and hold that this case should have been dismissed for Terwilliger’s failure to exhaust the remedies…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. United Steelworkers v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  4. Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  5. Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957

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

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. Hayes Jones v. General Motors Corporation and United Auto Workers, Local 1112Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
  2. Fox v. Parker Hannifin Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
  3. DeCoe v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
  4. Michael Emswiler v. CSX Transportation Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
  5. Fox v. Massey-Ferguson, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1995

54 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