Sommer v. State, Department of Transportation & Development
Louisiana Court of Appeal
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJjWALTZER, J.
Because the majority opinion in this case ignores positive federal statutory law and jurisprudence of the United States and Louisiana Supreme Courts, I must dissent. Not only is the majority opinion manifestly inconsistent in granting general damages connected to special damages that it finds to have been non-recoverable, it also makes legal history by creating in the Fourth Circuit of Louisiana the only state court jurisdiction within the United States in which a State entity is a “person” within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. I cannot in conscience acquiesce in this state’s court’s…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Quern v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Hafer v. MeloSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Roberts v. BenoitSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1992
- Melancon v. Hyatt Corp.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1991
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.