Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Haeberle v. University of Louisville

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided February 6, 2004No. 02-5643Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

GWIN,

United States District Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

Respectfully, I concur, in part, and I dissent, in part. As described below, I believe the Court reaches the correct result regarding Haeberle’s due process and First Amendment claims, although not because he failed to file this action within the statute of limitations. Instead, I find that he fails to show a protected interest in continued employment. With regard to the Court’s discussion of the application of the statute of limitations to Haeberle’s claims, I believe the Court’s opinion is wrong regarding two…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Paul v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Village of Willowbrook v. OlechSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Delaware State College v. RicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Roberts v. United States JayceesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Alan Weiner, D.P.M. v. Klais and Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API