Legal Opinion
Quinn v. Syracuse Model Neighborhood Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided January 8, 1980No. 576, Docket No. 79-7561PublishedCited by 747 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KAUFMAN, Chief Judge:
The “liberty” protected by the Fourteenth Amendment against arbitrary governmental interference is a necessarily amorphous concept, which continues to *442evolve as courts apply it to the specific circumstances of individual cases. Thus, where an infringement of a constitutionally protected interest in “liberty” is alleged, it is essential that a litigant be afforded a reasonable opportunity to prove facts which, taken together, state a claim. Summary dismissal of alleged Fourteenth Amendment violations based on deprivations of this interest, therefore, is appropriate only…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Perry v. SindermannSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Paul v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by747 opinions
- Pembaur v. City of CincinnatiSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- John C. Donahue v. Windsor Locks Board of Fire Commissioners, John R. Colli, Jr., Russell C. Gabrielson, and John R. Colli, IIICourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
- Kaytor v. Electric Boat Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2010
- Jerome Singleton v. City of New York, Ronald Salzer and Anthony DellaventuraCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
- Conaway v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988
742 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.