20 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2010 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Jenne v. Marantogreen2 sentences2010See, e.g., Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. McCor, 903 So.2d 353, 357-58 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (tribal immunity); Jenne v. Maranto, 825 So.2d 409, 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (Eleventh Amendment immunity); Stephens v. Geoghegan, 702 So.2d 517, 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (qualified immunity). 2010See, e.g., Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. McCor, 903 So.2d 353, 357-58 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (tribal immunity); Jenne v. Maranto, 825 So.2d 409, 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (Eleventh Amendment immunity); Stephens v. Geoghegan, 702 So.2d 517, 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (qualified immunity). | 3 | 3 |
Stephens v. Geoghegangreen2 sentences2010See, e.g., Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. McCor, 903 So.2d 353, 357-58 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (tribal immunity); Jenne v. Maranto, 825 So.2d 409, 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (Eleventh Amendment immunity); Stephens v. Geoghegan, 702 So.2d 517, 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (qualified immunity). 2010See, e.g., Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. McCor, 903 So.2d 353, 357-58 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (tribal immunity); Jenne v. Maranto, 825 So.2d 409, 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (Eleventh Amendment immunity); Stephens v. Geoghegan, 702 So.2d 517, 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (qualified immunity). | 2 | 2 |
Seminole Tribe of Florida v. McCorgreen2 sentences2010See, e.g., Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. McCor, 903 So.2d 353, 357-58 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (tribal immunity); Jenne v. Maranto, 825 So.2d 409, 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (Eleventh Amendment immunity); Stephens v. Geoghegan, 702 So.2d 517, 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (qualified immunity). 2010See, e.g., Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. McCor, 903 So.2d 353, 357-58 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (tribal immunity); Jenne v. Maranto, 825 So.2d 409, 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (Eleventh Amendment immunity); Stephens v. Geoghegan, 702 So.2d 517, 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (qualified immunity). | 2 | 2 |
Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Floridagreen2 sentences2008See Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44, 47 , 116 S.Ct. 1114 , 134 L.Ed.2d 252 (1996). 2008See Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44, 47 , 116 S.Ct. 1114 , 134 L.Ed.2d 252 (1996). | 2 | 2 |
Tennessee v. Lanegreen2 sentences2007See Lane, 541 U.S. at 517 , 124 S.Ct. 1978 ; Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 711-13 , 119 S.Ct. 2240 , 144 L.Ed.2d 636 (1999). 2 Important for present purposes, Eleventh Amendment (or sovereign) immunity bars an unconsented action against a state for damages, but does not bar a suit for nonmonetary relief, such as an injunction. 2007See Lane, 541 U.S. at 517 , 124 S.Ct. 1978 ; Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 711-13 , 119 S.Ct. 2240 , 144 L.Ed.2d 636 (1999). 2 Important for present purposes, Eleventh Amendment (or sovereign) immunity bars an unconsented action against a state for damages, but does not bar a suit for nonmonetary relief, such as an injunction. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Rendongreen2 sentences2007See 832 So.2d at 146 . 2007See 832 So.2d at 146 . | 2 | 2 |
Quern v. Jordangreen2 sentences1987See Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332 , 99 S.Ct. 1139 , 59 L.Ed.2d 358 (1979); Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974). 1987See Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332 , 99 S.Ct. 1139 , 59 L.Ed.2d 358 (1979); Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974). | 2 | 2 |
Alden v. Mainegreen2 sentences2007See Lane, 541 U.S. at 517 , 124 S.Ct. 1978 ; Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 711-13 , 119 S.Ct. 2240 , 144 L.Ed.2d 636 (1999). 2 Important for present purposes, Eleventh Amendment (or sovereign) immunity bars an unconsented action against a state for damages, but does not bar a suit for nonmonetary relief, such as an injunction. 2007See Lane, 541 U.S. at 517 , 124 S.Ct. 1978 ; Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 711-13 , 119 S.Ct. 2240 , 144 L.Ed.2d 636 (1999). 2 Important for present purposes, Eleventh Amendment (or sovereign) immunity bars an unconsented action against a state for damages, but does not bar a suit for nonmonetary relief, such as an injunction. | 1 | 3 |
Edelman v. Jordangreen2 sentences2002Finally, there is the danger that fear of being sued will `dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible [public officials], in the unflinching discharge of their duties.'"). [7] Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980). [8] See Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 677-78 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974) ("the Eleventh Amendment defense sufficiently partakes of the nature of a jurisdictional bar so that it need not be raised in the trial court...."); Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasury, 323 U.S. 459, 466-67 , 65 S.Ct. 347 , 89 L. 2002Finally, there is the danger that fear of being sued will `dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible [public officials], in the unflinching discharge of their duties.'"). [7] Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980). [8] See Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 677-78 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974) ("the Eleventh Amendment defense sufficiently partakes of the nature of a jurisdictional bar so that it need not be raised in the trial court...."); Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasury, 323 U.S. 459, 466-67 , 65 S.Ct. 347 , 89 L. | 1 | 2 |
Will v. Michigan Department of State Policegreen2 sentences1997Id. at 383 , 110 S.Ct. at 2446 -47 (citing, Will v. Michigan Dep't of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 , 109 S.Ct. 2304 , 105 L.Ed.2d 45 (1989), for the proposition that an entity with Eleventh Amendment immunity is not a "person" within the meaning of § 1983). 1997Id. at 383 , 110 S.Ct. at 2446 -47 (citing, Will v. Michigan Dep't of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 , 109 S.Ct. 2304 , 105 L.Ed.2d 45 (1989), for the proposition that an entity with Eleventh Amendment immunity is not a "person" within the meaning of § 1983). | 1 | 2 |
Shands Teaching Hospital & Clinics, Inc. v. Beech Street Corp.green1 sentence2005Corp. and Unisys Corp., 820 So.2d 979, 979 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). | 1 | 1 |
Trammell v. Stategreen2 sentences2002See Trammell v. State, 622 So.2d 1257, 1261 (Miss.1993) (“It is clear from a review of the record that Eleventh Amendment immunity was the sole reason for dismissal of the federal suit. 2002See Trammell v. State, 622 So.2d 1257, 1261 (Miss.1993) (“It is clear from a review of the record that Eleventh Amendment immunity was the sole reason for dismissal of the federal suit. | 1 | 1 |
Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasurygreen2 sentences2002Finally, there is the danger that fear of being sued will `dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible [public officials], in the unflinching discharge of their duties.'"). [7] Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980). [8] See Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 677-78 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974) ("the Eleventh Amendment defense sufficiently partakes of the nature of a jurisdictional bar so that it need not be raised in the trial court...."); Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasury, 323 U.S. 459, 466-67 , 65 S.Ct. 347 , 89 L. 2002Finally, there is the danger that fear of being sued will `dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible [public officials], in the unflinching discharge of their duties.'"). [7] Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980). [8] See Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 677-78 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974) ("the Eleventh Amendment defense sufficiently partakes of the nature of a jurisdictional bar so that it need not be raised in the trial court...."); Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasury, 323 U.S. 459, 466-67 , 65 S.Ct. 347 , 89 L. | 1 | 1 |
| Karchefske v. Department of Mental Healthgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mitchell v. Forsyth
green
2 sentences2010As our supreme court explained in the context of qualified immunity which, like the immunity at issue in this case, is immunity from suit rather than a defense to liabilitythe entitlement to immunity is "effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial" because the party entitled to the immunity cannot be "`re-immunized' if erroneously required to stand trial or face the other burdens of litigation." Tucker, 648 So.2d at 1189 (quoting Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985)). 2010As our supreme court explained in the context of qualified immunity which, like the immunity at issue in this case, is immunity from suit rather than a defense to liabilitythe entitlement to immunity is "effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial" because the party entitled to the immunity cannot be "`re-immunized' if erroneously required to stand trial or face the other burdens of litigation." Tucker, 648 So.2d at 1189 (quoting Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985)). | 3 | 2002–2010 |
Board of Trustees of Univ. of Ala. v. Garrett
green
2 sentences2007This point was made in Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett, 531 U.S. 356 , 121 S.Ct. 955 , 148 L.Ed.2d 866 (2001), where Eleventh Amendment immunity barred plaintiffs action for damages under Title I of the ADA, but did not bar injunctive relief. 2007This point was made in Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett, 531 U.S. 356 , 121 S.Ct. 955 , 148 L.Ed.2d 866 (2001), where Eleventh Amendment immunity barred plaintiffs action for damages under Title I of the ADA, but did not bar injunctive relief. | 3 | 2002–2007 |
Howlett Ex Rel. Howlett v. Rose
green
2 sentences2006Will establishes that the State and arms of the State, which have traditionally enjoyed Eleventh Amendment immunity, are not subject to suit under § 1983 in either federal court or state court. 496 U.S. at 365 , 110 S.Ct. 2430 (emphasis added). 2006Will establishes that the State and arms of the State, which have traditionally enjoyed Eleventh Amendment immunity, are not subject to suit under § 1983 in either federal court or state court. 496 U.S. at 365 , 110 S.Ct. 2430 (emphasis added). | 3 | 1990–2006 |
Tucker v. Resha
green
2 sentences2010As our supreme court explained in the context of qualified immunity which, like the immunity at issue in this case, is immunity from suit rather than a defense to liabilitythe entitlement to immunity is "effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial" because the party entitled to the immunity cannot be "`re-immunized' if erroneously required to stand trial or face the other burdens of litigation." Tucker, 648 So.2d at 1189 (quoting Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985)). 2010As our supreme court explained in the context of qualified immunitywhich, like the immunity at issue in this case, is immunity from suit rather than a defense to liabilitythe entitlement to immunity is "effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial" because the party entitled to the immunity cannot be "`re-immunized' if erroneously required to stand trial or face the other burdens of litigation." Tucker, 648 So.2d at 1189 (quoting Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985)). | 2 | 2010–2010 |
Ramah Navajo School Board, Inc. v. Bureau of Revenue
green
2 sentences1989As our supreme court stated in Hill , relying on Ramah *708 Navajo School Board v. Bureau of Revenue, 104 N.M. 302 , 720 P.2d 1243 (App.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 940 , 107 S.Ct. 423 , 93 L.Ed.2d 373 (1986), sovereign immunity and Eleventh Amendment immunity are distinct concepts. 1989As our supreme court stated in Hill , relying on Ramah *708 Navajo School Board v. Bureau of Revenue, 104 N.M. 302 , 720 P.2d 1243 (App.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 940 , 107 S.Ct. 423 , 93 L.Ed.2d 373 (1986), sovereign immunity and Eleventh Amendment immunity are distinct concepts. | 2 | 1987–1989 |
Brown v. North Carolina
green
2 sentences1989As our supreme court stated in Hill , relying on Ramah *708 Navajo School Board v. Bureau of Revenue, 104 N.M. 302 , 720 P.2d 1243 (App.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 940 , 107 S.Ct. 423 , 93 L.Ed.2d 373 (1986), sovereign immunity and Eleventh Amendment immunity are distinct concepts. 1989As our supreme court stated in Hill , relying on Ramah *708 Navajo School Board v. Bureau of Revenue, 104 N.M. 302 , 720 P.2d 1243 (App.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 940 , 107 S.Ct. 423 , 93 L.Ed.2d 373 (1986), sovereign immunity and Eleventh Amendment immunity are distinct concepts. | 2 | 1987–1989 |
Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee
green
2 sentences2002Finally, there is the danger that fear of being sued will `dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible [public officials], in the unflinching discharge of their duties.'"). [7] Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980). [8] See Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 677-78 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974) ("the Eleventh Amendment defense sufficiently partakes of the nature of a jurisdictional bar so that it need not be raised in the trial court...."); Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasury, 323 U.S. 459, 466-67 , 65 S.Ct. 347 , 89 L. 2002Finally, there is the danger that fear of being sued will `dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible [public officials], in the unflinching discharge of their duties.'"). [7] Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980). [8] See Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 677-78 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974) ("the Eleventh Amendment defense sufficiently partakes of the nature of a jurisdictional bar so that it need not be raised in the trial court...."); Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasury, 323 U.S. 459, 466-67 , 65 S.Ct. 347 , 89 L. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle
green
2 sentences2002We therefore hold that it was not entitled to assert any Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit in the federal courts." 429 U.S. at 280-81 , 97 S.Ct. 568 . 2002We therefore hold that it was not entitled to assert any Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit in the federal courts." 429 U.S. at 280-81 , 97 S.Ct. 568 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Gomez v. Toledo
green
2 sentences2002Finally, there is the danger that fear of being sued will `dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible [public officials], in the unflinching discharge of their duties.'"). [7] Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980). [8] See Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 677-78 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974) ("the Eleventh Amendment defense sufficiently partakes of the nature of a jurisdictional bar so that it need not be raised in the trial court...."); Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasury, 323 U.S. 459, 466-67 , 65 S.Ct. 347 , 89 L. 2002Finally, there is the danger that fear of being sued will `dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible [public officials], in the unflinching discharge of their duties.'"). [7] Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 , 100 S.Ct. 1920 , 64 L.Ed.2d 572 (1980). [8] See Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 677-78 , 94 S.Ct. 1347 , 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974) ("the Eleventh Amendment defense sufficiently partakes of the nature of a jurisdictional bar so that it need not be raised in the trial court...."); Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasury, 323 U.S. 459, 466-67 , 65 S.Ct. 347 , 89 L. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Ex Parte State of New York, No. 2
green
2 sentences1996E.g., Welch v. Texas Dep’t of Highways and Public Transp., 483 U.S. 468 , 107 S.Ct. 2941 , 97 L.Ed.2d 389 (1987); In re New York, 256 U.S. 490 , 41 S.Ct. 588 , 65 L.Ed. 1057 (1921); In re New York, 256 U.S. 503 , 41 S.Ct. 592 , 65 L.Ed. 1063 (1921). 1996E.g., Welch v. Texas Dep’t of Highways and Public Transp., 483 U.S. 468 , 107 S.Ct. 2941 , 97 L.Ed.2d 389 (1987); In re New York, 256 U.S. 490 , 41 S.Ct. 588 , 65 L.Ed. 1057 (1921); In re New York, 256 U.S. 503 , 41 S.Ct. 592 , 65 L.Ed. 1063 (1921). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Ex Parte State of New York, No. 1
green
2 sentences1996E.g., Welch v. Texas Dep’t of Highways and Public Transp., 483 U.S. 468 , 107 S.Ct. 2941 , 97 L.Ed.2d 389 (1987); In re New York, 256 U.S. 490 , 41 S.Ct. 588 , 65 L.Ed. 1057 (1921); In re New York, 256 U.S. 503 , 41 S.Ct. 592 , 65 L.Ed. 1063 (1921). 1996E.g., Welch v. Texas Dep’t of Highways and Public Transp., 483 U.S. 468 , 107 S.Ct. 2941 , 97 L.Ed.2d 389 (1987); In re New York, 256 U.S. 490 , 41 S.Ct. 588 , 65 L.Ed. 1057 (1921); In re New York, 256 U.S. 503 , 41 S.Ct. 592 , 65 L.Ed. 1063 (1921). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Welch v. Texas Department of Highways & Public Transportation
green
2 sentences1996Moreover, “a State does not waive Eleventh Amendment immunity in federal courts merely by waiving sovereign immunity in its own courts.” Welch, 483 U.S. at 473-74 , 107 S.Ct. at 2946 . 1996Moreover, “a State does not waive Eleventh Amendment immunity in federal courts merely by waiving sovereign immunity in its own courts.” Welch, 483 U.S. at 473-74 , 107 S.Ct. at 2946 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Mick v. Florida State Bd. of Dentistry
green
2 sentences1994No. 101-553 § 2 (a), 104 Stat. 2749 (Nov. 15, 1990), amending 17 U.S.C. § 501 to provide that relief for infringement is available against "`anyone' includ[ing] any State." See Unix System Laboratories, Inc. v. Berkeley Software Design, Inc., 832 F. Supp. 790 (D.N.J. 1993). [3] The Florida Equal Access to Justice Act, section 57.111, Florida Statutes (1993), confers final order authority on hearing officers to award attorney's fees and costs in certain circumstances. § 57.111(4)(d), Fla. Stat. (1993). [4] Before the appellate rules were revised in 1977, the Court in Mick v. Florida State Bd. o 1994No. 101-553 § 2 (a), 104 Stat. 2749 (Nov. 15, 1990), amending 17 U.S.C. § 501 to provide that relief for infringement is available against "`anyone' includ[ing] any State." See Unix System Laboratories, Inc. v. Berkeley Software Design, Inc., 832 F. Supp. 790 (D.N.J. 1993). [3] The Florida Equal Access to Justice Act, section 57.111, Florida Statutes (1993), confers final order authority on hearing officers to award attorney's fees and costs in certain circumstances. § 57.111(4)(d), Fla. Stat. (1993). [4] Before the appellate rules were revised in 1977, the Court in Mick v. Florida State Bd. o | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| Bv Engineering v. University of California, Los Angeles green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Joan F. Lane, D/B/A Lane & Co. v. The First National Bank of Boston
green
2 sentences1994Since the decisions in Lane v. First Nat'l Bank of Boston, 871 F.2d 166 (1st Cir.1989), and BV Engineering v. University of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, 858 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1090 , 109 S.Ct. 1557 , 103 L.Ed.2d 859 (1989) (both holding that Congress had not abrogated the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting the Copyright Act of 1976); contra Mills Music, Inc. v. State of Ariz., 591 F.2d 1278 (9th Cir.1979), Congress has enacted Pub.L. 1994Since the decisions in Lane v. First Nat'l Bank of Boston, 871 F.2d 166 (1st Cir.1989), and BV Engineering v. University of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, 858 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1090 , 109 S.Ct. 1557 , 103 L.Ed.2d 859 (1989) (both holding that Congress had not abrogated the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting the Copyright Act of 1976); contra Mills Music, Inc. v. State of Ariz., 591 F.2d 1278 (9th Cir.1979), Congress has enacted Pub.L. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| Unix System Laboratories, Inc. v. Berkeley Software Design, Inc. green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| Mills Music, Inc. v. State of Arizona and Arizona Coliseum and Exposition Center Board, a Body Politic Under and by Virtue of the State of Arizona green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
BV Engineering v. University of California
green
2 sentences1994Since the decisions in Lane v. First Nat'l Bank of Boston, 871 F.2d 166 (1st Cir.1989), and BV Engineering v. University of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, 858 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1090 , 109 S.Ct. 1557 , 103 L.Ed.2d 859 (1989) (both holding that Congress had not abrogated the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting the Copyright Act of 1976); contra Mills Music, Inc. v. State of Ariz., 591 F.2d 1278 (9th Cir.1979), Congress has enacted Pub.L. 1994Since the decisions in Lane v. First Nat'l Bank of Boston, 871 F.2d 166 (1st Cir.1989), and BV Engineering v. University of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, 858 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1090 , 109 S.Ct. 1557 , 103 L.Ed.2d 859 (1989) (both holding that Congress had not abrogated the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting the Copyright Act of 1976); contra Mills Music, Inc. v. State of Ariz., 591 F.2d 1278 (9th Cir.1979), Congress has enacted Pub.L. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Colonial Savings Ass'n v. Commissioner
green
2 sentences1994Since the decisions in Lane v. First Nat'l Bank of Boston, 871 F.2d 166 (1st Cir.1989), and BV Engineering v. University of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, 858 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1090 , 109 S.Ct. 1557 , 103 L.Ed.2d 859 (1989) (both holding that Congress had not abrogated the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting the Copyright Act of 1976); contra Mills Music, Inc. v. State of Ariz., 591 F.2d 1278 (9th Cir.1979), Congress has enacted Pub.L. 1994Since the decisions in Lane v. First Nat'l Bank of Boston, 871 F.2d 166 (1st Cir.1989), and BV Engineering v. University of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, 858 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1090 , 109 S.Ct. 1557 , 103 L.Ed.2d 859 (1989) (both holding that Congress had not abrogated the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting the Copyright Act of 1976); contra Mills Music, Inc. v. State of Ariz., 591 F.2d 1278 (9th Cir.1979), Congress has enacted Pub.L. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
County of Sonoma v. Herrington
green
2 sentences1994Since the decisions in Lane v. First Nat'l Bank of Boston, 871 F.2d 166 (1st Cir.1989), and BV Engineering v. University of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, 858 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1090 , 109 S.Ct. 1557 , 103 L.Ed.2d 859 (1989) (both holding that Congress had not abrogated the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting the Copyright Act of 1976); contra Mills Music, Inc. v. State of Ariz., 591 F.2d 1278 (9th Cir.1979), Congress has enacted Pub.L. 1994Since the decisions in Lane v. First Nat'l Bank of Boston, 871 F.2d 166 (1st Cir.1989), and BV Engineering v. University of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, 858 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1090 , 109 S.Ct. 1557 , 103 L.Ed.2d 859 (1989) (both holding that Congress had not abrogated the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting the Copyright Act of 1976); contra Mills Music, Inc. v. State of Ariz., 591 F.2d 1278 (9th Cir.1979), Congress has enacted Pub.L. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Atascadero State Hospital v. Scanlon red | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs. green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Martinez v. California green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Patsy v. Board of Regents of Fla. green | 1 | 1989–1989 |
| Shinholster v. Graham green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| Kapil v. Association of Pennsylvania State College green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| Kapil v. Association of Pennsylvania State College & University Faculties green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.