Legal Opinion
Davis v. Mobile Consortium of Ceta
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided October 12, 1988No. 87-7211PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JOHNSON, Circuit Judge:
This case involves an appeal by plaintiffs from the entry of judgment after trial on their claims brought under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983. We affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
Bennita Davis and Charles Maddox filed a class action in 1979 complaining under § 1983 of the inadequacy of the grievance procedures provided by The Mobile Consortium of CETA (“Consortium”) and its sub-grantees. The Consortium was organized as a “prime sponsor” under the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act, 29 U.S.C. § 801 et seq., (“CETA” or “the Act”),1 and as such received funds under the direction of the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Perry v. SindermannSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Maine v. ThiboutotSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Middlesex County Sewerage Authority v. National Sea Clammers Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Smith v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Wright v. City of Roanoke Redevelopment & Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Sylvia Driggins v. City of Oklahoma City, OklahomaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Greo v. TrujilloDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2003
- Hoyt Green v. City Of HamiltonCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1991
- Green v. City of HamiltonCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1991
- Torres v. MaldonadoDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2003
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.