InsideGov
Supreme Court · Decisions

Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. General Electric Co.

446 U.S. 1 · No. 79-105 · 1979 term · Burger Court

Decided Apr 22, 1980 · argued Jan 14, 1980

Judicial power · Federal Rules of Civil Procedure including Supreme Court Rules, application of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure in civil litigation, Circuit Court Rules, and state rules and admiralty rules

Majority opinion: Warren Burger

The voteMajority

9–09 in the majority, 0 in dissent

No dissent (9–0)

Vacated and remanded. Curtiss-Wright Corp. won.

What this ruling means

Vacated and remanded: the Supreme Court set aside the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, wiping it out without necessarily saying the result was wrong, and sent the case back for that court to decide again under the right legal standard.

Curtiss-Wright Corp. was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Won” means the Court gave that side the result it asked for.

From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.

Report a correction

Summary

The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.

Wikipedia has no article on this case, so there is no summary.

Data notes

The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.

Report a correction

How the justices voted

Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 1979 term. Filled: the 9 in the majority. Hollow: the 0 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.

More liberalMore conservativeMedianMarshallBrennanStevensBlackmunWhiteStewartPowellBurgerRehnquist

Majority(9)

Dissent(0)

  • None.
Data notes

Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.

Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.

Report a correction

The parties

Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.

Petitioner
Curtiss-Wright Corp.Seller or vendor
Respondent
General Electric Co.Buyer, purchaser
Reached the Court by
Certiorari (the Court chose to hear it)
Data notes

The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.

Report a correction

The law at issue

The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.

Provision
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including Appellate Procedure, or relevant rules of a circuit court Judicial Code, and admiralty rules
Kind of law
Court Rules
Decided by
Statutory construction
Data notes

The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.

Report a correction

Timeline

What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.

  1. Apr 22, 1980DecidedDecided · Decided 9–0: vacated and remanded. Curtiss-Wright Corp. won.
  2. Jan 14, 1980ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
  3. Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari).
  4. Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit: petition denied or appeal dismissed, with a dissent.
  5. Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the New Jersey U.S. District Court.
Data notes

From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.

Report a correction

Other decisions on the same issue

70 other argued cases since 1946 on federal Rules of Civil Procedure including Supreme Court Rules, application of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure in civil litigation, Circuit Court Rules, and state rules and admiralty rules, newest first.

  1. Berk v. Choy607 U.S. 187Jan 20, 2026 · 607 U.S. 187Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  2. Blom Bank Sal v. Honickman145 S. Ct. 1612Jun 5, 2025 · 145 S. Ct. 1612Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  3. Dupree v. Younger598 U.S. 729May 25, 2023 · 598 U.S. 729Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  4. Kemp v. United States142 S. Ct. 1856Jun 13, 2022 · 142 S. Ct. 1856Judicial power8–18–1 band

  5. City of San Antonio, Texas v. Hotels.com, L.P.141 S. Ct. 1628May 27, 2021 · 141 S. Ct. 1628Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  6. Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert139 S. Ct. 710Feb 26, 2019 · 139 S. Ct. 710Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  7. Animal Science Products v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co.138 S. Ct. 1865Jun 14, 2018 · 138 S. Ct. 1865Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  8. Hall v. Hall138 S. Ct. 1118Mar 27, 2018 · 138 S. Ct. 1118Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  9. Hamer v. Neighborhood Housing Services of Chicago138 S. Ct. 13Nov 8, 2017 · 138 S. Ct. 13Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  10. Gelboim v. Bank of Am. Corp.574 U.S. 405Jan 21, 2015 · 574 U.S. 405Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  11. Kouichi Taniguchi, Petitioner v. Kan Pacific Saipan, Ltd., dba Marianas Resort and Spa566 U.S. 560May 21, 2012 · 566 U.S. 560Judicial power6–36–3 band

  12. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., fka Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund, Inc., Petitioner v. Halliburton Co., et al.563 U.S. 804Jun 6, 2011 · 563 U.S. 804Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  13. Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P. A. v. Allstate Insurance Company559 U.S. 393Mar 31, 2010 · 559 U.S. 393Judicial power5–45–4 band

  14. Gonzalez v. Crosby545 U.S. 524Jun 23, 2005 · 545 U.S. 524Judicial power7–27–2 band
  15. Robert J. Devlin v. Robert A. Scardelletti et al.536 U.S. 1Jun 10, 2002 · 536 U.S. 1Judicial power6–36–3 band
  16. Esteban Ortiz, et al. v. Fibreboard Corporation, et al.527 U.S. 815Jun 23, 1999 · 527 U.S. 815Judicial power7–27–2 band
  17. Kumho Tire Company, Ltd., et al. v. Patrick Carmichael, etc., et al.526 U.S. 137Mar 23, 1999 · 526 U.S. 137Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  18. General Electric Company, et al. v. Robert K. Joiner et ux.522 U.S. 136Dec 15, 1997 · 522 U.S. 136Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  19. Amchem Products, Inc., et al. v. George Windsor et al.521 U.S. 591Jun 25, 1997 · 521 U.S. 591Judicial power6–27–2 band
  20. Carrie Jaffee, Special Administrator for Ricky Allen, Sr., Deceased v. Mary Lu Redmond et al.518 U.S. 1Jun 13, 1996 · 518 U.S. 1Judicial power7–27–2 band

  21. Lloyd Henderson v. United States517 U.S. 654May 20, 1996 · 517 U.S. 654Judicial power6–36–3 band
  22. Donald J. Willy v. Coastal Corporation, et al.503 U.S. 131Mar 3, 1992 · 503 U.S. 131Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  23. William Lewis Smith v. Wayne S. Barry, et al.502 U.S. 244Jan 14, 1992 · 502 U.S. 244Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  24. Business Guides, Inc. v. Chromatic Communications Enterprises, Inc. and Michael Shipp498 U.S. 533Feb 26, 1991 · 498 U.S. 533Judicial power5–45–4 band
  25. Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corporation, et al.496 U.S. 384Jun 11, 1990 · 496 U.S. 384Judicial power8–18–1 band
  26. Pavelic & Leflore v. Marvel Entertainment Group, a Division of Cadence Industries Corp., et al.493 U.S. 120Dec 5, 1989 · 493 U.S. 120Judicial power8–18–1 band
  27. Green v. Bock Laundry Machine Co.490 U.S. 504May 22, 1989 · 490 U.S. 504Judicial power6–36–3 band
  28. Osterneck et al. v. Ernst & Whinney489 U.S. 169Feb 21, 1989 · 489 U.S. 169Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  29. Beech Aircraft Corporation v. Rainey, John C., et al.488 U.S. 153Dec 12, 1988 · 488 U.S. 153Judicial power7–27–2 band
  30. Torres v. Oakland Scavenger Co. et al.487 U.S. 312Jun 24, 1988 · 487 U.S. 312Judicial power8–18–1 band
  31. Marino et al. v. Ortiz et al.484 U.S. 301Jan 13, 1988 · 484 U.S. 301Judicial power4–45–4 band

  32. Crawford Fitting Co. et al. v. J. T. Gibbons, Inc.482 U.S. 437Jun 15, 1987 · 482 U.S. 437Judicial power7–27–2 band
  33. Burlington Northern Railroad Co. v. Woods et al.480 U.S. 1Feb 24, 1987 · 480 U.S. 1Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  34. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of Catrett477 U.S. 317Jun 25, 1986 · 477 U.S. 317Judicial power5–45–4 band

  35. Schiavone et al. v. Fortune, aka Time, Inc.477 U.S. 21Jun 18, 1986 · 477 U.S. 21Judicial power6–36–3 band
  36. Crown, Cork & Seal Co., Inc. v. Parker462 U.S. 345Jun 13, 1983 · 462 U.S. 345Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  37. General Telephone Company of the Southwest v. Falcon457 U.S. 147Jun 14, 1982 · 457 U.S. 147Judicial power8–18–1 band
  38. Gulf Oil Co. et al. v. Bernard et al.452 U.S. 89Jun 1, 1981 · 452 U.S. 89Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  39. Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. August450 U.S. 346Mar 9, 1981 · 450 U.S. 346Judicial power6–36–3 band
  40. Walker v. Armco Steel Corp.446 U.S. 740Jun 2, 1980 · 446 U.S. 740Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  41. General Telephone Company of the Northwest, Inc., et al. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et al.446 U.S. 318May 12, 1980 · 446 U.S. 318Judicial power5–45–4 band
  42. Trammel v. United States445 U.S. 40Feb 27, 1980 · 445 U.S. 40Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  43. Oppenheimer Fund, Inc., et al. v. Sanders et al.437 U.S. 340Jun 19, 1978 · 437 U.S. 340Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  44. Bankers Trust Co. v. Mallis et al.435 U.S. 381Mar 28, 1978 · 435 U.S. 381Judicial power8–0Unanimous band
  45. Browder v. Director, Department of Corrections of Illinois434 U.S. 257Jan 10, 1978 · 434 U.S. 257Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  46. United Airlines, Inc. v. McDonald432 U.S. 385Jun 20, 1977 · 432 U.S. 385Judicial power5–36–3 band
  47. East Texas Motor Freight System, Inc. v. Rodriguez et al.431 U.S. 395May 31, 1977 · 431 U.S. 395Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  48. Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin et al.417 U.S. 156May 28, 1974 · 417 U.S. 156Judicial power6–36–3 band
  49. American Pipe & Construction Co. et al. v. Utah et al.414 U.S. 538Jan 16, 1974 · 414 U.S. 538Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  50. Zahn et al. v. International Paper Co.414 U.S. 291Dec 17, 1973 · 414 U.S. 291Judicial power6–36–3 band

  51. Colgrove v. Battin, U.S. District Judge413 U.S. 149Jun 21, 1973 · 413 U.S. 149Judicial power5–45–4 band
  52. Snyder v. Harris et al.394 U.S. 332Mar 25, 1969 · 394 U.S. 332Judicial power7–27–2 band
  53. Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co., Administrator v. Patterson, Administrator, et al.390 U.S. 102Jan 29, 1968 · 390 U.S. 102Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  54. Surowitz v. Hilton Hotels Corp. et al.383 U.S. 363Mar 7, 1966 · 383 U.S. 363Judicial power7–0Unanimous band

  55. Hanna v. Plumer, Executor380 U.S. 460Apr 26, 1965 · 380 U.S. 460Judicial power9–0Unanimous band

  56. Farmer v. Arabian American Oil Co.379 U.S. 227Dec 14, 1964 · 379 U.S. 227Judicial power7–27–2 band
  57. United States v. Merz et al.376 U.S. 192Feb 24, 1964 · 376 U.S. 192Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  58. National Equipment Rental, Ltd., v. Szukhent et al.375 U.S. 311Jan 6, 1964 · 375 U.S. 311Judicial power5–45–4 band

  59. Link v. Wabash Railroad Co.370 U.S. 626Jun 25, 1962 · 370 U.S. 626Judicial power4–36–3 band
  60. United States v. Diebold, Incorporated369 U.S. 654May 14, 1962 · 369 U.S. 654Judicial power8–0Unanimous band
  61. Sam Fox Publishing Co., Inc., et al. v. United States et al.366 U.S. 683May 29, 1961 · 366 U.S. 683Judicial power8–0Unanimous band
  62. Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles et Commerciales, S. A., v. Rogers, Attorney General, Successor to the Alien Property Custodian, et al.357 U.S. 197Jun 16, 1958 · 357 U.S. 197Judicial power8–0Unanimous band
  63. United States v. Procter & Gamble Co. et al.356 U.S. 677Jun 2, 1958 · 356 U.S. 677Judicial power6–36–3 band
  64. United States v. F. & M. Schaefer Brewing Co.356 U.S. 227Apr 7, 1958 · 356 U.S. 227Judicial power7–27–2 band
  65. Cold Metal Process Co. et al. v. United Engineering & Foundry Co.351 U.S. 445Jun 11, 1956 · 351 U.S. 445Judicial power7–27–2 band
  66. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Mackey et al.351 U.S. 427Jun 11, 1956 · 351 U.S. 427Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  67. Johnson, Administratrix, v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co.344 U.S. 48Nov 17, 1952 · 344 U.S. 48Judicial power5–45–4 band
  68. Sutphen Estates, Inc. v. United States et al.342 U.S. 19Nov 5, 1951 · 342 U.S. 19Judicial power5–18–1 band
  69. Globe Liquor Co., Inc. v. San Roman et al., Doing Business As International Industries332 U.S. 571Jan 5, 1948 · 332 U.S. 571Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
  70. Anderson, Receiver, v. Yungkau, Executor, et al.329 U.S. 482Jan 13, 1947 · 329 U.S. 482Judicial power5–27–2 band
Data notes

Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.

Report a correction

Official record

Read the full opinion on Justia and the argument audio on Oyez. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.