Legal Opinion
Armstrong v. Wilson
District Court, N.D. California
Decided September 20, 1996No. C 94-2307 CWPublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
WILKEN, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, a certified class consisting of all present and future California state prison inmates and parolees with mobility 1 , sight, hearing, learning or kidney disabilities, have moved for injunctive relief under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131 — 34, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“the Rehabilitation Act” or “Section 504”), 29 U.S.C. § 794. Defendants, various California state officials being sued in their official capacities, have moved for summary…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Turner v. SafleySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Bowers v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'nDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2000
- Kruger v. JenneDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2000
- Frederick L. v. Department of Public WelfareDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2001
- Anderson v. Department of Public WelfareDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1998
- Nihiser v. Ohio Environmental Protection AgencyDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1997
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.