Legal Opinion

Parker v. Barnhart

District Court, N.D. Iowa

Decided December 6, 2001No. C 01-3044-MWBPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS; PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE; AND PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

BENNETT, Chief Judge.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.INTRODUCTION.

A. Factual Background.

1. Statutory ffamework.

2. ’’Ticket to Work Act,” amendments .

a. Authorization of a “user fee”.

b. Mandate for a GAO study.

3. Announcement of the 2001 “user fee”.

4. The GAO Report.

Procedural Background.

1. The Complaint.

2. The parties’motions .

a. The defendants’ motion for summary judgment and judgment on the pleadings . CO to CO

b.…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Tristani Ex Rel. Karnes v. RichmanDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2009
  2. Ridge v. BarnhartDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2002
  3. Culbertson v. BarnhartDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API