Case Citator › Williams v. Ashland Engineering Co.

Williams v. Ashland Engineering Co.

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
First Circuit
Citation
45 F.3d 588
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
70 of 70
Citing cases (total)
70
Treatment dates
2000
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. Williams v. Ashland Engineering Co. has been overruled in part: the First Circuit abrogated its central ERISA preemption holding, while later courts continue to apply its separate rule on notice of an affirmative defense. All 70 flagged citations have been read, and the confirmed treatment is listed below.
Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

70 later cases cite Williams v. Ashland Engineering Co.; 70 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Williams v. Ashland Engineering Co.?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • The First Circuit abrogated Williams's ruling that ERISA preempted claims under the Massachusetts public works bond statute after intervening Supreme Court decisions changed the preemption analysis.

    Carpenters Local Union No. 26 v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. · First Circuit · filed

    We have considerably greater freedom than the district courts to evaluate the impact of recent Supreme Court precedent on our previous decisions. Having reexamined Williams against the changed legal landscape that now confronts us, we are persuaded that subsequent developments have overtaken our decision. Consequently, we abrogate the central holding of Williams,1 reverse the judgment below, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Williams v. Ashland Engineering Co. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace