Legal Opinion
Hartwick v. Bd. of Tr. of Johnson Cty. Com. Col.
District Court, D. Kansas
Decided January 31, 1992No. Civ. A. 89-2513-LPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
LUNGSTRUM, District Judge.
Before the court are the plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment (Doc. # 53) and the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. #48). A hearing was held on December 23, 1991. Because the arguments for and against the respective motions are interrelated, they will be considered concurrently. For the reasons more fully set forth below, the court will deny the plaintiff’s motion and grant the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
In this section 1983 action, one of the central questions the court must determine is whether a state actor’s…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Hudson v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Fun v. Virginia Military InstituteSupreme Court of Virginia · 1993
- Johnson v. GuhlDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2000
- Manning v. DAKOTA COUNTY SCHOOL DIST.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2010
- Anglemyer v. Hamilton County HospitalDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1994
- Brown v. Youth Center at TopekaDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.