No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT IVAN TOLEDO,

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "No. 05-1376 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT IVAN TOLEDO,"

Transcription

1 No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT IVAN TOLEDO, v. Plaintiff-Appellee JORGE SANCHEZ-RIVERA, Deputy President; GEORGE V. HILLYER, Chancellor; JOHN HERTZ, Dean; PEDRO PARILLA, Counselor; SONIA BAZAN, Design Professor; NATHANIEL FUSTER, Design Professor/Design Committee Director; UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO, Defendants-Appellants UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO, Rio Piedras Campus; UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO, Rio Piedras Campus - Resource Office for the Disabled; LUDIM DIAZ; UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO, Rio Piedras Campus, Legal Advisor s Office; LUIS M. VAZQUEZ, Director; MARIA LUGO, Legal Advisor; UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO, Rio Piedras Campus - School of Architecture; MANUEL GARCIA; LIZETTE COLON, Student Affairs Administrator; Defendants ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS INTERVENOR BRADLEY J. SCHLOZMAN Acting Assistant Attorney General JESSICA DUNSAY SILVER SARAH E. HARRINGTON Attorneys Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division Ben Franklin Station P.O. Box Washington, DC (202)

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE REASONS WHY ORAL ARGUMENT SHOULD BE HEARD STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION...1 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE...2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE...2 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT...5 ARGUMENT UNDER THE ANALYSIS OF TENNESSEE V. LANE, TITLE II IS VALID FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT LEGISLATION AS APPLIED IN THE CONTEXT OF PUBLIC EDUCATION...7 A. Lane Dictates A Category-By-Category Analysis, Not A Case-By-Case Analysis...10 B. Constitutional Rights At Stake...14 C. Historical Predicate Of Unconstitutional Disability Discrimination In Public Services Lane Conclusively Established The Adequacy Of The Predicate For Title II s Application To Discrimination In All Public Services History Of Disability Discrimination In Public Education..20 a. Record Of Exclusion From Education...22 b. Record Of Discriminatory Treatment Within Schools...26

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued): PAGE c. Record Of Educational Segregation...28 d. Record Of Physical Mistreatment Gravity Of Harm Of Disability Discrimination In Public Education This Court Should Consider The Context Of Public Education Rather Than The More Limited Context of Higher Education...32 D. As Applied To Discrimination In Education, Title II Is Congruent And Proportional To The Constitutional Rights At Issue And The History Of Discrimination...33 CONCLUSION...43 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE -ii-

4 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES: PAGE Acevedo Lopez v. Police Dep t of Puerto Rico, 247 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2001)...8 Alexander v. Choate, 469 U.S. 287 (1985)...41 Association of Disabled Ams. v. Florida Int l Univ., 405 F.3d 954 (11th Cir. 2005)...7, 19 Baird v. Rose, 192 F.3d 462 (4th Cir. 1999)...30 Bethel Sch. Dist. v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986)...31 Board of Educ. v. Cooperman, 507 A.2d 253 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1986) aff d as modified, 523 A.2d 655 (N.J. Sup. Ct. 1987)...25 Board of Educ. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982)...20, 42 Brown v. Board of Educ., 347 U.S. 483 (1954)... passim Chalk v. United States Dist. Ct. Cent. Dist., 840 F.2d 701 (9th Cir. 1988)...25 City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997)...8, 13 City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432 (1985)...16, 20, 41 Collins v. Harker Heights, 503 U.S. 115 (1992)...16 Constantine v. Rectors & Visitors of George Mason Univ., 411 F.3d 474 (4th Cir. 2005)...7, 19 County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833 (1998)...16 Daniel R.R. v. State Bd. of Educ., 874 F.2d 1036 (5th Cir. 1989) iii-

5 CASES (continued): PAGE District 27 Cmty. Sch. Bd. v. Board of Educ., 502 N.Y.S.2d 325 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1986)...25 Doe v. Belleville Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 118, 672 F. Supp. 342 (S.D. Ill. 1987)...25 Doe v. Dolton Elem. Sch. Dist. No. 148, 694 F. Supp. 440 (N.D. Ill. 1988)...25 Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975)...16 First Nat l Bank v. County of Yankton, 101 U.S. 129 (1879)...8 Gaston County v. United States, 395 U.S. 285 (1969)...40 Greer v. Rome City Sch. Dist., 950 F.2d 688 (11th Cir. 1991)...29 Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)...15 Hairston v. Drosick, 423 F. Supp. 180 (S.D. W. Va. 1976)...25, 29 Harrison v. Michigan, 350 F. Supp. 846 (E.D. Mich. 1972)...25 Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305 (1988)...21, 35 Jefferson v. Ysleta Indep. Sch. Dist., 817 F.2d 303 (5th Cir. 1987)...16 Johnston v. Ann Arbor Pub. Sch., 569 F. Supp (E.D. Mich. 1983)...29 Jusino Mercado v. Puerto Rico, 214 F.3d 34 (1st Cir. 2000)...8 Katzenbach v. Morgan, 384 U.S. 641 (1966)...40 Kiman v. New Hampshire Dep t of Corr., 301 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2002) , 13 Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents, 528 U.S. 62 (2000)...7, 13 -iv-

6 CASES (continued): PAGE Martinez v. School Bd., 861 F.2d 1502 (11th Cir. 1988)...25 Mills v. Board of Educ., 348 F. Supp. 866 (D.D.C. 1972)...25 Mississippi Univ. for Women v. Hogan, 458 U.S. 718 (1982)...39 Nevada Dep t of Human Res. v. Hibbs, 538 U.S. 721 (2003)... 13, 35, New York State Ass n for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Carey, 466 F. Supp. 48 (E.D.N.Y. 1979)...25 Olmstead v. L.C. ex rel. Zimring, 527 U.S. 581 (1999) Oregon v. Mitchell, 400 U.S. 112 (1970)...40 Palmore v. Sidoti, 466 U.S. 429 (1984)...16 Pennsylvania Ass n for Retarded Children v. Pennsylvania, 334 F. Supp (E.D. Pa. 1971)...25 Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982)...14, 31, 42 Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Auth. v. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., 506 U.S. 139 (1993)...2 Ray v. School Dist., 666 F. Supp (M.D. Fla. 1987)...25 Robertson v. Granite City Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 9, 684 F. Supp (S.D. Ill. 1988)...24 Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996)...16 Roncker v. Walter, 700 F.2d 1058 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 864 (1983)...29 Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) v-

7 CASES (continued): PAGE South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301 (1966)...40 State v. Board of Educ., 172 N.W. 153 (Wis. 1919)...27, 42 Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509 (2004)... passim Thomas v. Atascadero Unified Sch. Dist., 662 F. Supp. 376 (C.D. Cal. 1986)...24 United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996)... University of Alabama v. Garrett, 531 U.S. 356 (2001) , 23, 31 Wilson v. Marana Unified Sch. Dist. No. 6, 735 F.2d 1178 (9th Cir. 1984)...29 Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972)...15 CONSTITUTION AND FEDERAL STATUTES: U.S. Const. Art. IV, U.S.C. 1400(c)(2)(C) U.S.C U.S.C Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C et seq U.S.C (a)(3)...13, 19, 21, U.S.C (a)(6) U.S.C (a)(7) U.S.C (b)(1) U.S.C (2) U.S.C (3)...8 -vi-

8 FEDERAL STATUTES (continued): PAGE 42 U.S.C (Title I) U.S.C (Title II) , 4 42 U.S.C (1)(A) U.S.C (1)(B) U.S.C (2) U.S.C , U.S.C U.S.C U.S.C (Title III) U.S.C U.S.C (c)...5 Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act of 1984, Pub. L. No , 98 Stat Education Amendments of 1974, Pub. L. No , 88 Stat Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, Pub. L. No , 89 Stat Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments of 1983, Pub. L. No , 97 Stat Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments of 1986, Pub. L. No , 100 Stat Education of the Handicapped Act of 1975 (EHA), Pub. L. No , 84 Stat Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments Act of 1965, Pub. L. No , 79 Stat Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1966, Pub. L. No , 80 Stat vii-

9 FEDERAL STATUTES (continued): PAGE Handicapped Children s Protection Act of 1986, Pub. L. No , 100 Stat Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C et seq Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Pub. L. No , 87 Stat Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C , 35 STATE STATUTES: Act of Feb. 21, 1917, ch. 354, 5, 1917 Or. Laws Act of June 21, 1906, ch. 508, 12, 1906 Mass. Acts & Resolves Act of Mar. 3, 1921, ch. 235, 1921 S.D. Sess. Laws Act of May 18, 1965, ch. 584, 1965 N.C. Sess. Laws Ala. Code (1975)...20 Iowa Code Ann (1983)...20 Mont. Code Ann (1961)...20 Ohio Rev. Code Ann (2002)...20 Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 70, 1744 (West 1990)...20 Tex. Code Ann (West 1990) viii-

10 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: PAGE Commission on the Education of the Deaf s Report to Congress: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on the Handicapped of the Senate Comm. on Labor and Human Resources, 100th Cong., 2d Sess. (1988).. 24 Education for All Handicapped Children, : Hearings Before the Subcomm. on the Handicapped of the Senate Comm. on Labor and Public Welfare, 93d Cong., 1st Sess. (1973)...24, 26, 30, 37 GAO, Briefing Reports on Costs of Accommodations, Americans with Disabilities Act: Hearing Before the House Comm. on Small Business, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. (1990)...36 Hearing on the Commission on Education of the Deaf and Special Education Programs: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Select Education of the House Comm. on Education and Labor, 100th Cong., 2d Sess. (1988)...22 Staff of the House Comm. on Education and Labor, 101st Cong., 2d Sess., Legislative History of Public Law : The Americans with Disabilities Act 989 (Comm. Print 1990) (Vol. 2)... passim H.R. Rep. No. 485, Pt. 2, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. (1990)...36 S. Rep. No. 116, 101st Cong., 1st Sess. (1989)...23, 26, Cong. Rec (May 17, 1990)...24 REGULATIONS: 28 C.F.R (b)(1)(i) C.F.R (b)(1)(iii) C.F.R (b)(1)(vii)...5 -ix-

11 REGULATIONS (continued): PAGE 28 C.F.R (b)(7) C.F.R C.F.R MISCELLANEOUS: Frederick J. Weintraub & Alan R. Abeson, Appropriate Education for All Handicapped Children: A Growing Issue, 23 Syracuse L. Rev. (1972)...25 National Council on Disability, Back to School on Civil Rights: Advancing the Federal Commitment to Leave No Child Behind (2000)...29 National Council on the Handicapped, On the Threshold of Independence (1988) Office of the Att y Gen., Cal. Dep t of Justice, Attorney General s Commission on Disability: Final Report (1989)...27 Philip T.K. Daniel, Educating Students with Disabilities in the Least Restrictive Environment: A Slippery Slope for Educators, 35 J. of Educ. and Admin. (1997)...20 T. Cook, The Americans with Disabilities Act: The Move to Integration, 64 Temple L. Rev. (1991)...42 U.S. Civil Rights Comm n, Accomodating the Spectrum of Individual Abilities (1983)... 22, 29-30, 41 -x-

12 REASONS WHY ORAL ARGUMENT SHOULD BE HEARD Because this appeal will require this Court to adjudicate the constitutional validity of an Act of Congress, the United States believes oral argument would be appropriate and helpful.

13 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT No IVAN TOLEDO, v. Plaintiff-Appellee JORGE SANCHEZ-RIVERA, Deputy President; GEORGE V. HILLYER, Chancellor; JOHN HERTZ, Dean; PEDRO PARILLA, Counselor; SONIA BAZAN, Design Professor; NATHANIEL FUSTER, Design Professor/Design Committee Director; UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO, Defendants-Appellants UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO, Rio Piedras Campus; UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO, Rio Piedras Campus - Resource Office for the Disabled; LUDIM DIAZ; UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO, Rio Piedras Campus, Legal Advisor s Office; LUIS M. VAZQUEZ, Director; MARIA LUGO, Legal Advisor; UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO, Rio Piedras Campus - School of Architecture; MANUEL GARCIA; LIZETTE COLON, Student Affairs Administrator; Defendants ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS INTERVENOR STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION Plaintiff s complaint alleges, among other things, violations of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C et seq. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C On January 14, 2005, the district court denied defendants motion to dismiss the plaintiff s Title II claims on Eleventh

14 -2- Amendment immunity grounds, and subsequently denied defendants motion to reconsider on February 2, Defendants filed a timely notice of appeal on February 11, This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C See Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Auth. v. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., 506 U.S. 139, 147 (1993). STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE Whether the statutory provision abrogating Eleventh Amendment immunity for suits under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C et seq., is a valid exercise of Congress s authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, as it applies in the context of public education. STATEMENT OF THE CASE 1. Plaintiff, an individual with a disability, alleges that, while he was enrolled at the University of Puerto Rico School of Architecture, various university employees discriminated against him on the basis of his disability and refused to provide reasonable accommodations to him. J.A (Complaint). In particular, plaintiff suffers from Schizoaffective Disorder, a mental disability that caused him to miss some classes during his first year of enrollment. J.A Plaintiff alleges that, when he returned to class, one of his professors refused to provide reasonable accommodations to him, causing him to turn in an incomplete assignment. J.A. 6. Plaintiff alleges that the professor then ridiculed plaintiff s work in front of the class. J.A. 6. Repeated meetings with the professor and with school administrators did not result in the University providing reasonable accommodations to plaintiff,

15 -3- and plaintiff received a grade of D for the class in question. J.A During subsequent academic terms, plaintiff continued to suffer from his disability, requiring several hospital stays that resulted in more missed classes. J.A When he returned to school after his absences, he alleges, the school continued to refuse to provide reasonable accommodations to him and otherwise discriminated against him. J.A Plaintiff filed suit in federal court against the University and various University officials, alleging violations of, inter alia, Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. J.A. 30. The state defendants and the individual defendants sued in their official capacities moved to dismiss the Title II claims on Eleventh Amendment immunity grounds. J.A The district court initially granted defendants motion to dismiss the Title II claims on immunity grounds. J.A Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration after the Supreme Court s decision in Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509 (2004). J.A The district court granted the motion, holding that defendants do not enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity to plaintiff s Title II claims and reinstating those claims. J.A Defendants filed an interlocutory appeal to this Court. 2. In 1990, Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C et seq., to supplement the requirements of Section 504 and to provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities. 42 U.S.C (b)(1). Title I of the ADA, 42 U.S.C , addresses discrimination by employers

16 -4- affecting interstate commerce; Title II, 42 U.S.C , addresses discrimination by governmental entities in the operation of public services, programs, and activities, including transportation; and Title III, 42 U.S.C , addresses discrimination in public accommodations operated by private entities. This appeal concerns Title II, which provides that no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity. 42 U.S.C A public entity is defined to include any State or local government and its components. 42 U.S.C (1)(A) & (B). The term disability is defined as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of [an] individual; * * * a record of such an impairment; or * * * being regarded as having such an impairment. 42 U.S.C (2). A qualified individual with a disability is a person who, with or without reasonable modifications * * * meets the essential eligibility requirements for the governmental program or service. 42 U.S.C (2); 28 C.F.R The discrimination prohibited by Title II of the Disabilities Act includes, among other things, denying a government benefit to a qualified individual with a 1 Congress instructed the Attorney General to issue regulations to implement Title II based on prior regulations promulgated under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C See 42 U.S.C

17 -5- disability because of his disability, providing him with a lesser benefit than is given to others, or limiting his enjoyment of the rights and benefits provided to others. See 28 C.F.R (b)(1)(i), (iii), (vii). In addition, a public entity must make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures if the accommodation is necessary to avoid the exclusion of individuals with disabilities and can be accomplished without imposing an undue financial or administrative burden on the government, or fundamentally altering the nature of the service. See 28 C.F.R (b)(7). Title II may be enforced through private suits against public entities. See 42 U.S.C , 12203(c). Congress expressly abrogated the States Eleventh Amendment immunity to private suits in federal court. See 42 U.S.C SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT Congress validly abrogated the University s Eleventh Amendment immunity to plaintiff s claims under Title II of the ADA. Viewed in light of Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509 (2004), Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment legislation as applied to disability discrimination in public education. In Lane, the Court found that Congress enacted Title II against a backdrop of pervasive unequal treatment in the administration of state services and programs, including systematic deprivations of fundamental rights. Lane, 541 U.S. at 524. That history of unconstitutional discrimination, the Court held, authorized Congress to enact prophylactic legislation to address public services generally, see id. at 529,

18 -6- including public educational services. In any case, there is ample support for Congress s decision to extend Title II to public schools. Title II, as it applies to public education, is a congruent and proportionate response to that record. Title II is carefully tailored to respect Puerto Rico s legitimate interests while protecting against the risk of unconstitutional discrimination in education and remedying the lingering legacy of discrimination against people with disabilities in education. Thus, Title II applies in public education to prohibit discrimination based on hidden invidious animus that would be difficult to detect or prove directly. The statute also establishes reasonable uniform standards for treating requests for accommodations in public schools where unfettered discretionary decision-making has, in the past, led to irrational and invidious decisions. Moreover, in integrating students with disabilities among their peers, Title II acts to relieve the ignorance and stereotypes Congress found at the base of much discrimination in education. These limited prophylactic and remedial measures, judged against the backdrop of pervasive unconstitutional discrimination that Congress found both in public education and in other areas of governmental services, represent a good faith effort to make meaningful the guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment, not an illicit attempt to rewrite them.

19 -7- ARGUMENT UNDER THE ANALYSIS OF TENNESSEE V. LANE, TITLE II IS VALID FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT LEGISLATION AS APPLIED IN THE CONTEXT OF PUBLIC EDUCATION This Court should hold that Congress validly abrogated the University s sovereign immunity to private claims under Title II of the ADA in the education context, as have both courts of appeals to consider this question to date. 2 See Constantine v. Rectors & Visitors of George Mason Univ., 411 F.3d 474 (4th Cir. 2005); Association of Disabled Americans v. Florida Int l Univ., 405 F.3d 954 (11th Cir. 2005). Congress may abrogate the States immunity if it unequivocally expressed its intent to abrogate that immunity, Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents, 528 U.S. 62, 73 (2000), and acts pursuant to a valid exercise of its power under 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to enforce the substantive guarantees of that Amendment, Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 518 (2004). Congress clearly expressed its intent to abrogate sovereign immunity to Title II claims. See id. at The University argues, however, that Title II exceeds Congress s Fourteenth Amendment powers in the context of this case. 3 2 We note that the Supreme Court has granted two petitions for certiorari in a case presenting the question whether Title II is valid Section 5 legislation in the prison context. United States v. Georgia, No , and Goodman v. Georgia, No (collectively Goodman ). We recommend that the Court delay resolution of this appeal until the Supreme Court issues a decision in Goodman. 3 Regardless of the validity of Title II s abrogation provision as legislation to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment in the context of education, Congress could abrogate Puerto Rico s sovereign immunity pursuant to its Article IV authority to (continued...)

20 -8- In Lane, the Supreme Court considered the claims of two plaintiffs, George Lane and Beverly Jones, both of whom are paraplegics who use wheelchairs for mobility and who claimed that they were denied access to, and the services of, the state court system by reason of their disabilities in violation of Title II. 541 U.S. at 513. The state defendant in that case argued that Congress lacked the authority to abrogate the State s Eleventh Amendment immunity to these claims, and the Supreme Court in Lane disagreed. See id. at To reach this conclusion, the Court applied the three-part analysis for Fourteenth Amendment legislation created by City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997). The Court considered: (1) the constitutional right or rights that Congress sought to enforce when it enacted Title II, Lane, 541 U.S. at 522; (2) whether there was a history of unconstitutional disability discrimination to support Congress s determination that inadequate provision of public services and access to public facilities was an appropriate subject for prophylactic legislation, id. at 3 (...continued) make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States. U.S. Const. Art. IV, 3; see First Nat l Bank v. County of Yankton, 101 U.S. 129, 133 (1879) (Congress has full and complete legislative authority over the people of the Territories and all the departments of the territorial governments. ). We recognize, however, that this Court has adopted a presumption that Congress would not have intended to abrogate Puerto Rico s immunity to suit if Congress did not have the power to abrogate States Eleventh Amendment immunity, at least so long as a statute (like the ADA, see 42 U.S.C (3)) defines Puerto Rico as a State. See Jusino Mercado v. Puerto Rico, 214 F.3d 34, (1st Cir. 2000); see also Acevedo Lopez v. Police Dep t of Puerto Rico, 247 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2001). While we disagree with that presumption, we acknowledge that this panel is bound to apply it in this case.

21 -9-529; and (3) whether Title II is an appropriate response to this history and pattern of unequal treatment, as applied to the class of cases implicating access to judicial services. Id. at 530. With respect to the first question, the Court found that Title II enforces rights under the Equal Protection Clause as well as an array of rights subject to heightened constitutional scrutiny under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. With respect to the second question, the Court conclusively found a sufficient historical predicate of unconstitutional disability discrimination in the provision of public services to justify enactment of a prophylactic remedy pursuant to Congress s authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. And finally, with respect to the third question, the Court found that the congruence and proportionality of the remedies in Title II should be judged on a category-bycategory basis in light of the particular constitutional rights at stake in the relevant category of public services. 4 Applying the holding of Lane, this Court should conclude that Title II is valid Fourteenth Amendment Legislation as it applies in the context of public education. 4 The Court in Lane did not examine the congruence and proportionality of Title II as a whole because the Court found that the statute was valid Section 5 legislation as applied to the class of cases before it. Because Title II is valid Section 5 legislation as applied to the class of cases implicating students rights, this Court need not consider the validity of Title II as a whole. The United States continues to maintain, however, that Title II as a whole is valid Section 5 legislation because it is congruent and proportional to Congress s goal of eliminating discrimination on the basis of disability in the provision of public services an area that the Supreme Court in Lane determined is an appropriate subject for prophylactic legislation under Section 5. Lane, 541 U.S. at 529.

22 -10- A. Lane Dictates A Category-By-Category Analysis, Not A Case-By-Case Analysis In their brief (Def. Br , 22-25), defendants suggest that this Court should consider whether Title II is valid Section 5 legislation, not as applied to the context of public education, but as applied to the facts of this case, and should uphold the statute only if the Court finds that plaintiff alleges a constitutional violation. In support of this suggestion, Puerto Rico relies on the reasoning of the vacated panel decision of this Court in Kiman v. New Hampshire Department of Corrections, 301 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2002), which analyzed an Eleventh Amendment challenge to Title II by considering Title II as applied to the allegations in the case before it, rather than by considering Title II in all of its applications. 5 Because the panel in Kiman found that the plaintiff had alleged constitutional violations, the Court limited its holding to a finding that Congress acted within its powers in subjecting the states to private suit under Title II of the ADA, at least as that Title is applied to cases in which a court identifies a constitutional violation by the state. Id. at 24. The panel acknowledged that: It may be that the legislative record taken as a whole supports Congress s conclusion that the enactment of Title II taken as a whole, 5 That opinion is no longer precedential, however, because the full Court granted rehearing en banc, vacating the panel opinion, and subsequently split evenly, thereby affirming the judgment of the district court. 332 F.3d 29 (1st Cir. 2003). The Supreme Court then granted the plaintiff s petition for certiorari, vacated the judgment of the en banc court, and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Lane. 541 U.S (2004). This Court remanded it to the district court, which held for the defendants on the merits and did not reach the Eleventh Amendment issue. It is now on appeal from that decision. See No

23 -11- including the abrogation of sovereign immunity, is within the section five power. * * * It might also be that the legislative record taken as a whole supports some of Congress s decisions to render states liable for some acts not in violation of the Constitution, but not others. Id. at 23. However, the panel declined to reach those broader questions because it could uphold Title II as applied to the case before it. But in the wake of Lane, this Court must consider the validity of Title II and its abrogation provision as applied to the entire category of public education rather than merely as applied to the facts of the instant case. 6 Both of the plaintiffs in Lane were paraplegics who use wheelchairs for mobility and who were denied physical access to and the services of the state court system because of their disabilities. Plaintiff Lane alleged violations that implicated his rights under the Due Process Clause and the Confrontation Clause namely, that when he was physically unable to appear to answer criminal charges because the courthouse was inaccessible, he was arrested and jailed for failure to appear. Plaintiff Jones alleged violations that implicated her equal protection rights namely, that she could not work as a certified court reporter because she could not gain access to a number of county courthouses. 541 U.S. at In analyzing Congress s power to enact Title II, however, the Supreme Court discussed the full range of applications Title II could have in cases implicating the accessibility of judicial services, Lane, 514 U.S. at 531, including applications to 6 Indeed, Puerto Rico acknowledges in its brief (Def. Br ) that the Supreme Court s approach in Lane differs from the panel s approach in Kiman.

24 -12- criminal defendants, civil litigants, jurors, public spectators and press, and witnesses. Id. at (discussing constitutional rights at stake in courthouse context); id. at 527 (discussing evidence presented to Congress of disability discrimination in the provision of judicial services); see also id. at 525 n.14 (considering cases involving the denial of interpretive services to deaf defendants and the exclusion of blind and hearing impaired persons from jury duty). Thus, a number of the statutory applications and implicated constitutional rights that the Court found relevant to its analysis in Lane were not pressed by the plaintiffs or directly implicated by the facts of their case. For instance, neither Lane nor Jones alleged that he or she was unable to participate in jury service or was subjected to a jury trial that excluded persons with disabilities from jury service. Similarly, neither Lane nor Jones was prevented by disability from participating in any civil litigation, nor did either allege a violation of First Amendment rights. The facts of their cases also did not implicate Title II s requirement that government, in the administration of justice, provide aides to assist persons with disabilities in accessing services, such as sign language interpreters or materials in Braille, 541 U.S. at 532, yet the Supreme Court considered the full range of constitutional rights and Title II remedies potentially at issue, framing its analysis in terms of the class of cases implicating the accessibility of judicial services. Id. at 531 (emphasis added).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION ELIZABETH WELCH, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 7:06-cv-00137-gec ) VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE ) AND STATE

More information

No. 02-10360-JJ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. ASSOCIATION FOR DISABLED AMERICANS, et al.,

No. 02-10360-JJ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. ASSOCIATION FOR DISABLED AMERICANS, et al., No. 02-10360-JJ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ASSOCIATION FOR DISABLED AMERICANS, et al., v. Plaintiffs - Appellants FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Defendant - Appellee

More information

No. 01-2640 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT RAMON BADILLO-SANTIAGO,

No. 01-2640 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT RAMON BADILLO-SANTIAGO, No. 01-2640 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT RAMON BADILLO-SANTIAGO, v. Plaintiff-Appellee HON. MIRIAM NAVEIRA-MERLY, in her official capacity as Administrator of the Judiciary

More information

Case 4:09-cv-00121-JHM -ERG Document 21 Filed 12/22/10 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 138

Case 4:09-cv-00121-JHM -ERG Document 21 Filed 12/22/10 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 138 Case 4:09-cv-00121-JHM -ERG Document 21 Filed 12/22/10 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 138 CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:09CV-00121-M UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY OWENSBORO DIVISION LINDA McCOLLUM

More information

No. 02-10190 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT LUCINDA G. MILLER; ELAINE KING-MILLER, Plaintiffs-Appellees

No. 02-10190 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT LUCINDA G. MILLER; ELAINE KING-MILLER, Plaintiffs-Appellees No. 02-10190 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT LUCINDA G. MILLER; ELAINE KING-MILLER, Plaintiffs-Appellees v. TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER, Defendant-Appellant

More information

No. 03-50538 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT CHRISTIAN M. RANDOLPH,

No. 03-50538 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT CHRISTIAN M. RANDOLPH, No. 03-50538 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT CHRISTIAN M. RANDOLPH, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, TEXAS REHABILITATION COMMISSION, (MARY) ESTER DIAZ, LARRY ANDERSON, ELIZABETH GREGOWICZ,

More information

Case 5:10-cv-01025-OLG Document 150 Filed 11/12/12 Page 1 of 6

Case 5:10-cv-01025-OLG Document 150 Filed 11/12/12 Page 1 of 6 Case 5:10-cv-01025-OLG Document 150 Filed 11/12/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION Hon. Orlando Garcia ERIC STEWARD, by his next friend

More information

5 Discrimination Based on Disability

5 Discrimination Based on Disability 5 Discrimination Based on Disability I. Overview 5.1 Darcie R. Brault Allyson A. Miller II. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) A. The Purpose of the ADA 5.2 B. Who Must Comply with the ADA

More information

Mandatory Reporting of Child Abuse 6/2009 State Mandatory Reporters Language on Privilege Notes Alabama

Mandatory Reporting of Child Abuse 6/2009 State Mandatory Reporters Language on Privilege Notes Alabama Alabama any other person called upon to render aid to any child ALA. CODE 26-14-10 Alaska ALA. CODE 26-14-3(a) paid employees of domestic violence and sexual assault programs, and crisis intervention and

More information

LEGAL RIGHTS OF DISABLED PRISONERS

LEGAL RIGHTS OF DISABLED PRISONERS KNOW YOUR RIGHTS LEGAL RIGHTS OF DISABLED PRISONERS ACLU National Prison Project Important Note: The law is always evolving. If you have access to a prison law library, it is a good idea to confirm that

More information

Supreme Court of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida Supreme Court of Florida No. SC04-110 AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA RULES OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROCEDURE [December 2, 2004] PER CURIAM. The Florida Bar s Workers Compensation Rules Committee has filed its

More information

Case: 09-1166 Document: 00319804259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2009 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No.

Case: 09-1166 Document: 00319804259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2009 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. Case: 09-1166 Document: 00319804259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2009 PER CURIAM. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 09-1166 LOU MARRA HOGG S, Appellant v. NOT PRECEDENTIAL STATE OF

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Lorrie Logsdon sued her employer, Turbines, Inc.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Lorrie Logsdon sued her employer, Turbines, Inc. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit October 20, 2010 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court LORRIE LOGSDON, Plaintiff Appellant, v. TURBINES,

More information

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICE OF THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION Student Hearing Office 810 First Street, NE, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20002

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICE OF THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION Student Hearing Office 810 First Street, NE, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20002 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICE OF THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION Student Hearing Office 810 First Street, NE, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20002 OSSE Student Hearing Office August 19, 2013 PETITIONER,

More information

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS REL: 12/4/09 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate

More information

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH This opinion is subject to revision before final publication in the Pacific Reporter 2012 UT 92 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH In the Matter of the Application of TIMOTHY W. SPENCER TIMOTHY

More information

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICE OF THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION Student Hearing Office 810 First Street, NE, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20002

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICE OF THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION Student Hearing Office 810 First Street, NE, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20002 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICE OF THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION Student Hearing Office 810 First Street, NE, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20002 OSSE Student Hearing Office January 23, 2014 PETITIONER,

More information

Disability Discrimination and

Disability Discrimination and Disability Discrimination and Parker v. Metropolitan Life: Separate, but Equal? Barry W. Wall, MD In August 1997, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that disability insurance obtained as an

More information

Case 5:14-cv-00141-XR Document 37 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 7

Case 5:14-cv-00141-XR Document 37 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 7 Case 5:14-cv-00141-XR Document 37 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION TAMMY FABIAN, v. Plaintiffs, CAROLYN COLVIN, Commissioner

More information

CEPI Education Law Newsletter Dr. Richard S. Vacca, Editor; Senior Fellow, CEPI

CEPI Education Law Newsletter Dr. Richard S. Vacca, Editor; Senior Fellow, CEPI THE COMMONWEALTH EDUCATIONAL POLICY INSTITUTE AN INSTITUTE IN THE CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY CEPI Education Law Newsletter Dr. Richard S. Vacca, Editor; Senior Fellow, CEPI April 2016: Vol. 14-8 NEW DEVELOPMENTS

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT NO. 10-4345. DOROTHY AVICOLLI, Appellant

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT NO. 10-4345. DOROTHY AVICOLLI, Appellant NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT NO. 10-4345 DOROTHY AVICOLLI, Appellant v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, a/k/a GEICO; ANGELO CARTER; CHARLES CARTER On Appeal

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL C., a Minor, By and Through : CIVIL ACTION His Parents, GEORGE C. and NANCY : C. AMBLER, PA 19002; GEORGE C., and :

More information

Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION JAMES E. TOMLINSON and DARLENE TOMLINSON, his wife, v. Plaintiffs,

More information

2013 IL App (3d) 120130-U. Order filed September 23, 2013 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2013

2013 IL App (3d) 120130-U. Order filed September 23, 2013 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2013 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1). 2013 IL App (3d) 120130-U Order

More information

CRS Report for Congress

CRS Report for Congress Order Code RL32928 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Breastfeeding and Jury Duty: State Laws, Court Rules, and Related Issues May 17, 2005 Douglas Reid Weimer Legislative Attorney American

More information

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit YVONNE MURPHY HICKMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee 2015-5134 Appeal from the

More information

The N.C. State Bar v. Wood NO. COA10-463. (Filed 1 February 2011) 1. Attorneys disciplinary action convicted of criminal offense

The N.C. State Bar v. Wood NO. COA10-463. (Filed 1 February 2011) 1. Attorneys disciplinary action convicted of criminal offense The N.C. State Bar v. Wood NO. COA10-463 (Filed 1 February 2011) 1. Attorneys disciplinary action convicted of criminal offense The North Carolina State Bar Disciplinary Hearing Commission did not err

More information

Tax Research: Understanding Sources of Tax Law (Why my IRC beats your Rev Proc!)

Tax Research: Understanding Sources of Tax Law (Why my IRC beats your Rev Proc!) Tax Research: Understanding Sources of Tax Law (Why my IRC beats your Rev Proc!) Understanding the Federal Courts There are three levels of Federal courts that hear tax cases. At the bottom of the hierarchy,

More information

Legal Exemptions for Religious Based Medical Neglect. Ariel Alvarez Montclair State University April 19, 2013 Center for Child Advocacy

Legal Exemptions for Religious Based Medical Neglect. Ariel Alvarez Montclair State University April 19, 2013 Center for Child Advocacy Legal Exemptions for Religious Based Medical Neglect Ariel Alvarez Montclair State University April 19, 2013 Center for Child Advocacy Overview *About the research and goals. *Methods *Results *Discussion

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE Filed 6/29/16 In re A.S. CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 99,491. KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, JILL POWELL, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 99,491. KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, JILL POWELL, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 99,491 KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, v. JILL POWELL, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. Under the Kansas Act for Judicial Review and Civil Enforcement

More information

Accessible Web Design

Accessible Web Design 1. What Is Accessible Web Design? Accessible Web Design Accessible web design is the practice of designing web pages so that they can be navigated and read by everyone, regardless of location, experience,

More information

2015 IL App (1st) 141179-U. No. 1-14-1179 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

2015 IL App (1st) 141179-U. No. 1-14-1179 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2015 IL App (1st) 141179-U THIRD DIVISION May 20, 2015 No. 1-14-1179 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances

More information

Workers Compensation: A Response To the Recent Attacks on the Commission s Authority to Suspend A Claimant s Benefits

Workers Compensation: A Response To the Recent Attacks on the Commission s Authority to Suspend A Claimant s Benefits Workers Compensation: A Response To the Recent Attacks on the Commission s Authority to Suspend A Claimant s Benefits by Charles F. Midkiff Midkiff, Muncie & Ross, P.C. 300 Arboretum Place, Suite 420 Richmond,

More information

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE STATE STATUTORY

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE STATE STATUTORY MEDICAL MALPRACTICE STATE STATUTORY REFERENCE GUIDE 41 MEDICAL MALPRACTICE STATE STATUTORY REFERENCE GUIDE The following references to statutes relevant to medical malpractice cases are intended exclusively

More information

ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST FEDERAL AGENCIES UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT

ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST FEDERAL AGENCIES UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST FEDERAL AGENCIES UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT The Clean Air Act authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency administratively to assess civil penalties

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIRANDA L. MAHER : CIVIL ACTION : v. : : MOORE COLLEGE OF ART AND DESIGN : NO. 98-2978 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER BECHTLE, J. FEBRUARY,

More information

This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2014).

This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2014). This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2014). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A14-1939 Troy K. Scheffler, Appellant, vs. Minnesota

More information

Supreme Court of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida Supreme Court of Florida No. SC04-1461 CANTERO, J. STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, vs. SEAN E. CREGAN, Respondent. [July 7, 2005] We must decide whether a court may grant jail-time credit for time spent

More information

Deficit Reduction Act Employee Information Requirements

Deficit Reduction Act Employee Information Requirements November 9, 2006 Deficit Reduction Act Employee Information Requirements The Deficit Reduction Act ( DRA ) requires states participating in the Medicaid program to amend their State Plans to mandate that

More information

Case: 1:11-cv-07802 Document #: 48 Filed: 03/12/14 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:

Case: 1:11-cv-07802 Document #: 48 Filed: 03/12/14 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:<pageid> Case: 1:11-cv-07802 Document #: 48 Filed: 03/12/14 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION VONZELL WHITE, Plaintiff, Case

More information

STATE OF TENNESSEE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. February 3, 2014. Opinion No. 14-15 QUESTIONS

STATE OF TENNESSEE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. February 3, 2014. Opinion No. 14-15 QUESTIONS STATE OF TENNESSEE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Juveniles on Sex Offender Registry February 3, 2014 Opinion No. 14-15 QUESTIONS 1. Would a juvenile who committed a violent juvenile sexual offense before

More information

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 16a0079n.06. No. 14-6213 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 16a0079n.06. No. 14-6213 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 16a0079n.06 No. 14-6213 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT R.K., by his next friends, J.K. and R.K., v. Plaintiff-Appellant, BOARD

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DONALD GALLOWAY, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 91-0644 (JHG SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA and THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Defendants.

More information

STATE OF ARIZONA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

STATE OF ARIZONA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF ARIZONA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION by TERRY GODDARD ATTORNEY GENERAL September 6, 2006 No. I06-003 (R06-024) Re: Amending Contracts of Certain School Employees to

More information

3:14-cv-03073-CSB-DGB # 1 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS (SPRINGFIELD DIVISION) COMPLAINT

3:14-cv-03073-CSB-DGB # 1 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS (SPRINGFIELD DIVISION) COMPLAINT 3:14-cv-03073-CSB-DGB # 1 Page 1 of 10 E-FILED Tuesday, 04 March, 2014 04:10:31 PM Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS (SPRINGFIELD

More information

Students. With. for. Public. Free. Appropriate. Requirements Under Section 504 of The Rehabilitation Act of 1973

Students. With. for. Public. Free. Appropriate. Requirements Under Section 504 of The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 for Students With Disabilities: Free Appropriate Public Education Requirements Under Section 504 of The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 Free Appropriate Public Education for Students With Disabilities: Requirements

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Emily McCulley is an accomplished young woman suffering from a serious

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Emily McCulley is an accomplished young woman suffering from a serious EMILY MCCULLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit TENTH CIRCUIT November 14, 2014 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court v. THE UNIVERSITY

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 98-6475. RANDY L. JOHNSON, Sr., TENNESSEE TECHNICAL CENTER AT MEMPHIS, No.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 98-6475. RANDY L. JOHNSON, Sr., TENNESSEE TECHNICAL CENTER AT MEMPHIS, No. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6475 RANDY L. JOHNSON, Sr., v. Plaintiff-Appellee TENNESSEE TECHNICAL CENTER AT MEMPHIS, Defendant-Appellant No. 98-6701 LORI ANN PARR,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 12-16291 Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 0:12-cv-61429-RSR.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 12-16291 Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 0:12-cv-61429-RSR. Case: 12-16291 Date Filed: 06/17/2013 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 12-16291 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 0:12-cv-61429-RSR MICHAEL

More information

Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States No. 11-1197 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- VERNON HADDEN,

More information

57 of 62 DOCUMENTS. No. 5-984 / 05-0037 COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. 2006 Iowa App. LEXIS 172. March 1, 2006, Filed

57 of 62 DOCUMENTS. No. 5-984 / 05-0037 COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. 2006 Iowa App. LEXIS 172. March 1, 2006, Filed Page 1 57 of 62 DOCUMENTS JAMES C. GARDNER, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. HEARTLAND EXPRESS, INC., and NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants-Appellees. No. 5-984 / 05-0037 COURT OF APPEALS

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2007-IA-00621-SCT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2007-IA-00621-SCT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2007-IA-00621-SCT CHARLES E. BUNTON, III AND HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF VICKSBURG v. DARRELL KING AND MARY KING DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/05/2007 TRIAL JUDGE: HON.

More information

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

Fourteenth Court of Appeals Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed December 6, 2001. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-01-00113-CV STAFFORD MUNICIPAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant V. L.P. AND Y.P., AS NEXT FRIENDS OF L.P.,

More information

Case 3:07-cv-06160-MLC-JJH Document 80 Filed 09/10/2008 Page 1 of 15

Case 3:07-cv-06160-MLC-JJH Document 80 Filed 09/10/2008 Page 1 of 15 Case 3:07-cv-06160-MLC-JJH Document 80 Filed 09/10/2008 Page 1 of 15 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY : LAUREN KAUFMAN, et al., : CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-6160 (MLC) :

More information

Case 1:07-cv-00320-JFM Document 38 Filed 07/24/08 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Case 1:07-cv-00320-JFM Document 38 Filed 07/24/08 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Case 1:07-cv-00320-JFM Document 38 Filed 07/24/08 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL * OF BALTIMORE, * * Plaintiff, * * v. * Civil No. JFM

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Respondent, APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PIMA COUNTY

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Respondent, APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PIMA COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO STATE OF ARIZONA, Petitioner/Appellant, HON. CHARLES SHIPMAN, Judge of the Green Valley Justice Court, in and of the County of Pima, v. and THOMAS

More information

Case 2:13-cv-00217-RJS Document 16 Filed 08/12/13 Page 1 of 14

Case 2:13-cv-00217-RJS Document 16 Filed 08/12/13 Page 1 of 14 Case 2:13-cv-00217-RJS Document 16 Filed 08/12/13 Page 1 of 14 PHILIP S. LOTT (5750) STANFORD E. PURSER (13440) Assistant Utah Attorneys General JOHN E. SWALLOW (5802) Utah Attorney General 160 East 300

More information

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20507. Jeremy Nathan, Complainant,

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20507. Jeremy Nathan, Complainant, U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20507 Commissioner Constance S. Barker Jeremy Nathan, Complainant, v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General, Department of Justice (Federal

More information

50-State Analysis. School Attendance Age Limits. 700 Broadway, Suite 810 Denver, CO 80203-3442 303.299.3600 Fax: 303.296.8332

50-State Analysis. School Attendance Age Limits. 700 Broadway, Suite 810 Denver, CO 80203-3442 303.299.3600 Fax: 303.296.8332 0-State Analysis School Attendance Age Limits 700 Broadway, Suite 810 Denver, CO 80203-32 303.299.3600 Fax: 303.296.8332 Introduction School Attendance Age Limits By Marga Mikulecky April 2013 This 0-State

More information

"(b) If so, should installation operating funds be used for this purpose?"

(b) If so, should installation operating funds be used for this purpose? \ ~~/ g65-r7 sitj > THE * COMPTROLLER GENERAL DECISION >½h7;,. OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON. D. C. 2054B FILE: B-199291 DATE: June 19, 1981 MATTER OF:EEO Regulations - Attorney Fees DIGEST: 1. Title

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Submitted March 3, 2010 * Decided March

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT CAPITAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENT SENATE, CAPITAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE BLACK STUDENT UNION, CAPITAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE LATIN AMERICAN STUDENT ASSOCIATION,

More information

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS REL: 5/29/09 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate

More information

Jhone M. Ebert, Senior Deputy Commissioner Richard J. Trautwein, Esq., Counsel and Deputy Commissioner of Legal Affairs

Jhone M. Ebert, Senior Deputy Commissioner Richard J. Trautwein, Esq., Counsel and Deputy Commissioner of Legal Affairs THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234 OFFICE OF STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES 89 Washington Avenue, Room 318-M EB Phone: (518) 486-6090; Fax: (518) 474-8299

More information

APPENDIX 4. A. State Courts. Alaska Superior Court. Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals Alabama Circuit Court. Arizona Superior Court

APPENDIX 4. A. State Courts. Alaska Superior Court. Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals Alabama Circuit Court. Arizona Superior Court APPENDIX 4 COURT ABBREVIATIONS This appendix contains abbreviations for federal courts. Abbreviations for state courts can be developed by consulting Appendix 1 and Rule 2 concerning abbreviations and

More information

Determining Jurisdiction for Patent Law Malpractice Cases

Determining Jurisdiction for Patent Law Malpractice Cases Determining Jurisdiction for Patent Law Malpractice Cases This article originally appeared in The Legal Intelligencer on May 1, 2013 As an intellectual property attorney, the federal jurisdiction of patent-related

More information

Case 8:13-cv-01731-VMC-TBM Document 36 Filed 03/17/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID 134 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Case 8:13-cv-01731-VMC-TBM Document 36 Filed 03/17/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID 134 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION Case 8:13-cv-01731-VMC-TBM Document 36 Filed 03/17/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID 134 JOHN and JOANNA ROBERTS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 8:13-cv-1731-T-33TBM

More information

or refusal to grant or to continue assistance under such program or activity to any recipient as to whom there has been an express finding on the

or refusal to grant or to continue assistance under such program or activity to any recipient as to whom there has been an express finding on the CITE 42 USC Sec. 2000d 01/06/97 TEXT Sec. 2000d. Prohibition against exclusion from participation in, denial of benefits of, and discrimination under federally assisted programs on ground of race, color,

More information

Illinois Official Reports

Illinois Official Reports Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Certain Underwriters at Lloyd s London v. The Burlington Insurance Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 141408 Appellate Court Caption CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD S LONDON,

More information

ADARAND CONSTRUCTORS, INC. v. SLATER, SEC- RETARY OF TRANSPORTATION, et al.

ADARAND CONSTRUCTORS, INC. v. SLATER, SEC- RETARY OF TRANSPORTATION, et al. 216 OCTOBER TERM, 1999 Syllabus ADARAND CONSTRUCTORS, INC. v. SLATER, SEC- RETARY OF TRANSPORTATION, et al. on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the tenth circuit

More information

Case 4:13-cv-01104 Document 40 Filed in TXSD on 02/26/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Case 4:13-cv-01104 Document 40 Filed in TXSD on 02/26/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION Case 4:13-cv-01104 Document 40 Filed in TXSD on 02/26/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION SHARON JACKSON, et al. Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL ACTION H-13-1104

More information

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE : AL JAZEERA AMERICA, LLC, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : C.A. No. 8823-VCG : AT&T SERVICES, INC., : : Defendant. : : MOTION TO STAY OCTOBER 14, 2013 LETTER OPINION

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA M E M O R A N D U M A N D O R D E R

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA M E M O R A N D U M A N D O R D E R IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CLEOPATRA MCDOUGAL-SADDLER : CIVIL ACTION : vs. : : ALEXIS M. HERMAN, SECRETARY, : NO. 97-1908 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR : M

More information

Case 2:06-cv-04937-KSH-PS Document 36 Filed 09/28/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 2:06-cv-04937-KSH-PS Document 36 Filed 09/28/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 2:06-cv-04937-KSH-PS Document 36 Filed 09/28/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY NOT FOR PUBLICATION SAMUEL G. JONES, et. Al., Plaintiff, v. Civ. Action No. 06-4937

More information

U.S. Supreme Court Decisions Relating to Same-Sex Marriage

U.S. Supreme Court Decisions Relating to Same-Sex Marriage WISCONSIN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMORANDUM U.S. Supreme Court Decisions Relating to Same-Sex Marriage Hollingsworth v. Perry challenged California s Proposition 8, the state s constitutional

More information

Case 2:06-cv-02026-CM Document 104 Filed 01/23/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 2:06-cv-02026-CM Document 104 Filed 01/23/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 2:06-cv-02026-CM Document 104 Filed 01/23/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION v. No. 06-2026-CM

More information

Challenging EEOC Conciliation Charges

Challenging EEOC Conciliation Charges Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Challenging EEOC Conciliation Charges Law360, New

More information

Case 1:09-cv-02007-ELH Document 46 Filed 07/26/10 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND, NORTHERN DIVISION

Case 1:09-cv-02007-ELH Document 46 Filed 07/26/10 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND, NORTHERN DIVISION Case 1:09-cv-02007-ELH Document 46 Filed 07/26/10 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND, NORTHERN DIVISION JOETTE PAULONE, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL NO.: WDQ-09-2007 CITY

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-14-01515-CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-14-01515-CV AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed August 25, 2015. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-01515-CV TXU ENERGY RETAIL COMPANY L.L.C., Appellant V. FORT BEND INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,

More information

Case 2:08-cv-04597-LDD Document 17 Filed 02/05/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:08-cv-04597-LDD Document 17 Filed 02/05/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 2:08-cv-04597-LDD Document 17 Filed 02/05/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA SUZANNE BUTLER, Individually and as : Administratrix of the Estate

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 12-13381 Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 3:11-cr-00281-RBD-JBT-1.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 12-13381 Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 3:11-cr-00281-RBD-JBT-1. Case: 12-13381 Date Filed: 05/29/2013 Page: 1 of 12 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 12-13381 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 3:11-cr-00281-RBD-JBT-1

More information

U.S. Supreme Court City of Riverside v. Rivera, 477 U.S. 561 (1986)

U.S. Supreme Court City of Riverside v. Rivera, 477 U.S. 561 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court City of Riverside v. Rivera, 477 U.S. 561 (1986) City of Riverside v. Rivera No. 85-224 Argued March 31, 1986 Decided June 27, 1986 477 U.S. 561 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT

More information

180 [92 Op. Att y COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES. December 17, 2007

180 [92 Op. Att y COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES. December 17, 2007 180 [92 Op. Att y COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES MARYLAND HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION JUDICIAL REVIEW LITIGATION BETWEEN STATE ENTITIES December 17, 2007 The Honorable Rudolph C. Cane Maryland House of Delegates

More information

CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS ACT OF 2005

CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS ACT OF 2005 PUBLIC LAW 109 2 FEB. 18, 2005 CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS ACT OF 2005 VerDate 14-DEC-2004 04:23 Mar 05, 2005 Jkt 039139 PO 00002 Frm 00001 Fmt 6579 Sfmt 6579 E:\PUBLAW\PUBL002.109 BILLW PsN: PUBL002 119 STAT.

More information

MICHIGAN FAMILY LAW ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION CASE LAW UPDATE INTRODUCTION ARBITRATION

MICHIGAN FAMILY LAW ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION CASE LAW UPDATE INTRODUCTION ARBITRATION MICHIGAN FAMILY LAW ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION CASE LAW UPDATE by Lee Hornberger Arbitration and Mediation Office of Lee Hornberger INTRODUCTION This article reviews some Michigan Supreme Court and Court

More information

WORKERS COMPENSATION OPTIONS FOR TRIBES IN WASHINGTON STATE

WORKERS COMPENSATION OPTIONS FOR TRIBES IN WASHINGTON STATE WORKERS COMPENSATION OPTIONS FOR TRIBES IN WASHINGTON STATE Peter S. Hicks WILLIAMS KASTNER & GIBBS PLLC 2005. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Peter S. Hicks I. INTRODUCTION. This paper provides an overview of the

More information

Cook v. Lowes Home Ctrs., Inc. NO. COA10-88. (Filed 18 January 2011)

Cook v. Lowes Home Ctrs., Inc. NO. COA10-88. (Filed 18 January 2011) Cook v. Lowes Home Ctrs., Inc. NO. COA10-88 (Filed 18 January 2011) Workers Compensation foreign award subrogation lien in North Carolina reduced no abuse of discretion The trial court did not abuse its

More information

PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT LESLIE TAYLOR; CAROLINE NICHOLE COOKE; JACOB COOKE; COLORADO CROSS- DISABILITY COALITION, PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Plaintiffs - Appellants, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court

More information

WORKING PAPER SERIES

WORKING PAPER SERIES WORKING PAPER SERIES SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY AND YOU: HOW NEW YORK STATE EMPLOYEES CAN ENFORCE THEIR FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS Brent Landau, Associate, Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC December 2005 WPS

More information

Case 3:05-cv-01784-SRC-JJH Document 20 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 1 of 26

Case 3:05-cv-01784-SRC-JJH Document 20 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 1 of 26 Case 3:05-cv-01784-SRC-JJH Document 20 Filed 10/13/2005 Page 1 of 26 PETER C. HARVEY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY R.J. Hughes Justice Complex 25 Market Street P.O. Box 112 Trenton, New Jersey 08625 Attorney

More information

CASE NO. 1D09-0765. Rhonda B. Boggess of Taylor, Day, Currie, Boyd & Johnson, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

CASE NO. 1D09-0765. Rhonda B. Boggess of Taylor, Day, Currie, Boyd & Johnson, Jacksonville, for Appellant. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA ATHENA F. GRAINGER, as personal representative of the ESTATE OF SAMUEL GUS FELOS, Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION

More information

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS, v. LAURA G. RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, Appellee. No. 08-11-00235-CV Appeal from the County Court at Law No.

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals USCA Case #12-5117 Document #1394950 Filed: 09/18/2012 Page 1 of 5 United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT No. 12-5117 September Term, 2012 FILED ON: SEPTEMBER 18, 2012 CENTER

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Memorandum and Order

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Memorandum and Order IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CAROSELLA & FERRY, P.C., Plaintiff, v. TIG INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 00-2344 Memorandum and Order YOHN,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 10-10304. D. C. Docket No. 0:09-cv-60016-WPD. versus

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 10-10304. D. C. Docket No. 0:09-cv-60016-WPD. versus IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 10-10304 D. C. Docket No. 0:09-cv-60016-WPD HOLLYWOOD MOBILE ESTATES LIMITED, a Florida Limited Partnership, versus MITCHELL CYPRESS,

More information

No. 1-10-2072 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

No. 1-10-2072 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1). SIXTH DIVISION JUNE 30, 2011 IN

More information

ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES, INSTITUTIONAL ABUSE AND LONG TERM CARE OMBUDSMAN PROGRAM LAWS: CITATIONS, BY STATE

ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES, INSTITUTIONAL ABUSE AND LONG TERM CARE OMBUDSMAN PROGRAM LAWS: CITATIONS, BY STATE ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES, INSTITUTIONAL ABUSE AND LONG TERM CARE OMBUDSMAN PROGRAM LAWS: CITATIONS, BY STATE (Laws current as of 12/31/06) Prepared by Lori Stiegel and Ellen Klem of the American Bar Association

More information

2014 IL App (1st) 141707. No. 1-14-1707 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

2014 IL App (1st) 141707. No. 1-14-1707 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2014 IL App (1st) 141707 FIRST DIVISION AUGUST 31, 2015 No. 1-14-1707 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances

More information