Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Reis

{{Use mdy dates|date=March 2025}}

{{Infobox SCOTUS case

|Litigants=Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Reis

|ArgueDate=

|ArgueYear=

|DecideDate=May 4

|DecideYear=1981

|FullName=

|USVol=451

|USPage=401

|Docket=

|ParallelCitations=

|Prior=

|Subsequent=

|Holding=Section 301 of Taft-Hartley Act did not create liability for damages for unionists for breach of no-strike clauses.

|Majority=Brennan

|JoinMajority=

|Concurrence=Powell (in part)

|Dissent=Burger

|JoinDissent=Rehnquist

|LawsApplied=Taft-Hartley Act

}}

Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Reis, {{ussc|volume=451|page=401|year=1981|el=no}}, was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that Section 301 of Taft-Hartley Act did not create liability for damages for unionists for breach of no-strike clauses.{{ussc|name=Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Reis|volume=451|page=401|year=1981}}.{{Cite book |last=Scully |first=Patrick R. |title=The Developing Labor Law |last2=Weinstock |first2=Ira |date=2012 |editor-last=Higgins |editor-first=John E. |edition=6th |page=1719}}