Legal Opinion
Hill v. Blind Industries & Services of Maryland
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 4, 1999No. 97-55382PublishedCited by 165 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PANNER, District Judge:
Defendant Blind Industries & Services of Maryland (“BISM”) appeals from a judgment in favor of plaintiff Jerry Hill (dba American Sewing & Bag Company) *756(“Hill”) on Hill’s breach of contract claim. We affirm.
The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court properly denied BISM’s motion to dismiss this action pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment. We hold that BISM consented to jurisdiction in federal court by actively litigating this action on the merits, while waiting until trial to first assert Eleventh Amendment immunity. We therefore do not decide whether BISM is…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Railroad Comm'n of Tex. v. Pullman Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De GuineeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Sosna v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by165 opinions
- Armstrong v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Emma C. Lively v. Wild Oats Markets, Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Rahne Pistor v. Carlos GarciaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Amanda J., a Minor, by and Through Her Guardian Ad Litem, Annette J. v. Clark County School District, and Nevada State Department of EducationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Dossey Douglas v. California Department of Youth AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
160 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.