Legal Opinion
Putnam v. University of New Hampshire
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided February 4, 1994No. 92-671PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum Opinion
Batchelder, J.
The plaintiff, Daniel S. Putnam, appeals the decision of the Superior Court (Gray, J.) dismissing his amended complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1986) because it did not allege that the defendant, the University of New Hampshire, acted with a discriminatory purpose or intent. We affirm.
The gravamén of the plaintiff’s amended complaint is that the university’s policy regarding eligibility for in-state tuition discriminates against out-of-state students who later seek to change their residency status. The university moved to dismiss the civil rights claim for…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. FeeneySupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Valerie Watterson v. Eileen PageCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
- Golden State Transit Corp. v. City of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Robert P. Coyne v. City of SomervilleCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
- Jay Edwards, Inc. v. BakerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1987
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Workplace Systems, Inc. v. CIGNA Property & Casualty InsuranceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1999
- Huguelet v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1997