Legal Opinion
Kalman v. Carre
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided January 13, 2005No. 3:02-cv-02052PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DKT. NO. 36]
HALL, District Judge.
The plaintiff, Robert Kalman, initiated this action against the defendants, Alexander Carre, James Cassidy, Sean Hart, and Susan McKinley, on November 19, 2002. [Dkt. No. 2] The plaintiffs Amended Complaint [Dkt. No. 25] alleges violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. section 12101, the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, and certain provisions of the Connecticut Constitution. On March 16, 2004, the defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Younger v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Stump v. SparkmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Middlesex County Ethics Committee v. Garden State Bar Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Carol A. Gallo v. Prudential Residential Services, Limited Partnership, Doing Business as Prudential Relocation ManagementCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Allen v. ZhongDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2020
- Allen v. ZhongDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2021
- Cleary v. GrossmanDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2024
- Li v. PeckDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2022