Legal Opinion
McAuliffe v. Carlson
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided January 16, 1975No. Civ. 15687PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL RELIEF
NEWMAN, District Judge.
Plaintiff’s motion for supplemental relief presents in an unusual context questions concerning waiver of Eleventh Amendment protection. In the first stage of this litigation, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, this Court granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and entered an order declaring unconstitutional Conn.Gen.Stat. §§ 17-318 and 4-68g, McAuliffe v. Carlson, 377 F.Supp. 896 (D.Conn.1974) (MeAuliffe I) . Under the authority of these statutes defendant, Connecticut’s Commissioner of Finance and Control,…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Bradley v. School Bd. of RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Ford Motor Co. v. Department of TreasurySupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Parden v. Terminal Railway of Alabama State Docks DepartmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Philpott v. Essex County Welfare BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fayle v. StapleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
- Fayle v. StapleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
- Robert A. McAuliffe v. Adolf G. Carlson, Commissioner of Finance and Control of the State OfconnecticutCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
- Opinion No. (1981), Nebraska Attorney General Reports1981