Boeing Co. v. March’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 25 U.S.C. § 2710 (§ 11 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 152 (§ 2 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co. · Allied Chemical & Alkali Workers of America, Local Union No. 1 v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. · Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. Schoonejongen
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.