Office Planning Group, Inc v. Baraga-Houghton-Keweenaw Child Development Board
Michigan Supreme Court
1DissentKelly, J.
I agree with the majority that our state courts have jurisdiction over plaintiffs claim under the federal Head Start Act, 42 USC 9831 et seq. However, I disagree with its conclusion that the act, at 42 USC 9839(a), does not provide a private cause of *511action. The statutory language, the focus of the legislation, its history, and its purpose imply a congressional intent to allow private actions. Therefore, I would find such a right and affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals.
DEFENDANT’S VARIOUS JURISDICTIONAL CHALLENGES
Defendant raises a variety of jurisdictional arguments on appeal. It…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Cannon v. University of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Alexander v. SandovalSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.