Legal Opinion
Duran v. Carruthers
District Court, D. New Mexico
Decided February 11, 1988No. Civ. 77-0721-JBPublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
BURCIAGA, District Judge.
The defendants in the above-captioned civil action have filed a motion seeking to vacate portions of the consent decree approved and entered by this Court in 1980. 1 As stated in their brief in support of the motion to vacate, “[defendants’ fundamental contention is that portions of the 1980 decree create rights that are not grounded in federal law and thus cannot be enforced by a federal court.” Defendants’ brief, p. 2. The defendants’ motion relies on the eleventh amendment, and related considerations of comity. The motion has been…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Will Stone v. City And County Of San FranciscoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Stone v. City & County of San FranciscoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Duran v. CarruthersCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1989
- Ruiz v. JohnsonDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1999
- Macias v. New Mexico Department of LaborDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2014
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.