Chet A. Hurd, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Pittsburg State University, Defendant-Appellant, and William Mark Simmons, Defendant, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Amicus Curiae., 29 F.3d 564 (10th Cir. 1994)

Federal Circuits, 10th Cir. (July 12, 1994)

Docket number: 93-3082


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/chet-hurd-pittsburg-simmons-amicus-36100115
Id. vLex: VLEX-36100115

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Cir. - the Osage Tribal Council, on Behalf of the Osage Tribe of Indians, Petitioner, v. United States Department of Labor, Respondent, Chris White, Intervenor., 187 F.3d 1174 (10th Cir. 1999)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Cir. - Chet A. Hurd, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pittsburg State University, Defendant-Appellee. United States of America, Intervenor., 109 F.3d 1540 (10th Cir. 1997)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Cir. - Migneault v. Peck (10th Cir. 1998)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Cir. - Joanne B. Migneault, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Peck, President; David L. Mckinney, Vice President for Business and Finance; Paul Roth, M.D., Dean of the School of Medicine; Romeo Ortiz, Director of Human Resources, Defendants, and University of New Mexico; Jane E. Henney, M.D., Vice President for Health Sciences, Defendants-Appellants, United States of America, Intervenor, American Association of Retired Persons, Amicus Curiae., 158 F.3d 1131 (10th Cir. 1998) Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Peck, President; David L. Mckinney, Vice President for Business and Finance; Paul Roth, M.D., Dean of the School of Medicine; Romeo Ortiz, Director of Human Resources, Defendants, and University of New Mexico; Jane E. Henney, M.D., Vice President for Health Sciences, Defendants-Appellants, United States of America, Intervenor, American Association of Retired Persons, Amicus Curiae.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Cir. - Ardeshir Goshtasby, Plaintiff-Appellee, and United States of America, Intervenor-Appellee, v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, Defendant-Appellant., 141 F.3d 761 (7th Cir. 1998)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Cir. - Robert J. Blanciak; Raymond Bowman; William Burkett; Marlin D. Byers; Richard Cook; Robert E. Delledonne; Jack Delcimmuto; Richard T. Farah; Donald E. Holmes; James Markby; Donald C. Miller; Howard Mumau; Domonic Pocetti; Edward E. Primack; Anthony Rodnicki; William D. Rowe; Don Shellhammer; Paul R. Sibik; James Walker; Theodore W. Walker; Francis N. Amaranto; Leroy A. Calderone; Ronald E. Calhoun; Louis Ecaravaggio; Joseph W. Clark; George L. Fleeger; Ronald R. Fulton; Richard L. George; John M. Gulyas; Jack C. Hesketh; Robert Hutcherson; Robert D. Knabb; Bernard C. Kumpf; William John Morda; James E. Patty; Laura G. Poskus; Arthur L. Ramer; F. Eugene Smeltzer; Robert L. Stewart; Wesley E. Suman; Douglas E. Talmadge; Jack Wilmot, Jr., Individually and on Behalf of all Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Allegheny Ludlum Corporation; United Steelworkers of America; and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Labor & Industry; Harris Wofford, Secretary of ..., 77 F.3d 690 (3rd Cir. 1996)

Text:

Carl A. Gallagher, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Robert T. Stephan, Atty. Gen., with him on the briefs), Topeka, KS, for defendant-appellant.

Mark A. Buchanan, The Popham Law Firm, P.C., Kansas City, MO, for plaintiff-appellee.

Paul D. Ramshaw, Attorney (Donald R. Livingston, Gen. Counsel, Gwendolyn Young Reams, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, and Vincent J. Blackwood, Asst. Gen. Counsel, with him on the brief), U.S. E.E.O. Com., Washington, DC, amicus curiae.

Before LOGAN and McKAY, Circuit Judges, and SAM,* District Judge.

McKAY, Circuit Judge.

The issue in this case is whether lawsuits under the Age Discrimination Employment Act ("ADEA") brought by private litigants against the state in federal court are barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity. In a thorough and well-reasoned opinion published at 821 F.Supp. 1410 (D.Kan.1993), the district court held that Congress intended to abrogate states' Eleventh Amendment immunity when it passed the ADEA. The only additions we can make to the district court's opinion are the citations for two more cases that support its holding. Specifically, in addition to the cases cited by the district court, both the Seventh Circuit, see Heiar v. Crawford County, Wis., 746 F.2d 1190 (1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1027 , 105 S.Ct. 3500, 87 L.Ed.2d 631 (1985), and the First Circuit, see Ramirez v. Puerto Rico Fire Serv., 715 F.2d 694 (1st Cir.1983), have held that Congress intended to abrogate states' Eleventh Amendment immunity when it passed the ADEA. Accordingly, we affirm for substantially the same reasons given by the district court.

AFFIRMED.

* Honorable David Sam, United States District Judge for the District of Utah, sitting by designation

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access