Skip to main content
Second Circuit· 1/23/2002

Abramson v. Pataki

Citations

  • 278 F.3d 93
  • 2002 WL 84231

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that even if agreement contained a promise to hire appellants for employment at the Javitz Center “it would not have created a property interest because the NYCCOC’s discretion to hire or fire an employee was unlimited.”
  • union members not rehired by public benefit corporation running the Javits Center could not show deprivation of legal right or status
  • \[T]he plain language of the recognition agreement shows that it does not create any sort of a property interest in employment ... because the [employer's] discretion to hire or fire an employer was unlimited.\
  • claim by members of a group of more than 1,000 people insufficient

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cudahy, Katzmann, Walker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

43 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.