Legal Opinion
Graef v. Chemical Leaman Tank Lines
District Court, E.D. Texas
Decided August 4, 1994No. 1:94-CV 0216PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND
COBB, District Judge.
Defendants removed this case asserting federal question jurisdiction arising out of the preemptive force of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA). Plaintiffs have moved to remand asserting that the LMRA does not preempt their state law causes of action. For the following reasons, the motion to remand is DENIED.
I. FACTS
At all relevant times, plaintiffs Graef and McClain were employed by Chemical Lea-man Tank Lines (Chemical Leaman) as truck drivers. The plaintiffs originally sued Chemical Leaman and other…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Lingle v. Norge Division of Magic Chef, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Avco Corp. v. Aero Lodge No. 735, International Ass'n of MacHinists & Aerospace WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Horton v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Victor C. Baris v. Sulpicio Lines, Inc., Caltex Petroleum, Inc., Caltex Petroleum Corporation, and Caltex Oil CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1991
- William Jones v. Roadway Express, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1991
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Munoz v. H & M WHOLESALE, INC.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1996
- James L. Graef v. Chemical Leaman Corporation, Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc., Dennis Copeland, and John GallagherCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1997
- Ayers v. ARA Health Services, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 1995
- Garcia v. Rainbo Baking Co. of HoustonDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1997
- Graef v. Chemical Leaman CorpCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1997
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.