Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp.
United States Supreme Court
464 U.S. 238 (1984)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Karen Silkwood was a laboratory analyst at a nuclear plant owned by Kerr-McGee Corporation (Kerr-McGee) (defendant). Through testing performed before Silkwood left work, she discovered that she had been contaminated with plutonium. Testing showed that Silkwood’s apartment was also contaminated, and the levels were high enough that most of her personal possessions had to be destroyed. Further testing revealed contamination inside Silkwood’s body as well. However, Silkwood died in an unrelated automobile accident before the extent of her internal-organ contamination was determined. Bill Silkwood (plaintiff), Karen’s father and the administrator of her estate, sued Kerr-McGee for causing Karen’s personal injuries and property damage. This lawsuit contained state-law claims but was filed in federal court using diversity jurisdiction. The lawsuit alleged state-law claims against Kerr-McGee. The jury found that Kerr-McGee had caused the contamination and awarded Silkwood compensatory damages for the personal injuries and property damage and $10 million in punitive damages. Kerr-McGee appealed. Among other rulings, the Tenth Circuit vacated the punitive-damages award, finding that the state-law punitive-damages award was preempted by federal law. Silkwood appealed to the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court converted the invalid appeal into a petition for certiorari and then agreed to review the preemption issue.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (White, J.)
Dissent (Powell, J.)
Dissent (Blackmun, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.