Alejandro Perez v. Laredo Junior College

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a due process claim for the denial of a pay raise after attaining a doctoral degree outside of the plaintiff’s teaching area was a single act
• “plaintiff must establish that the unconstitutional or illegal act was a part of ‘standard operating procedure,’ a fixed and continuing practice.”
• \The restriction on use ... occurred upon enactment of the ordinance. No City action since then has added to [the plaintiff's] alleged injury.\
• “[T]he mere allegation that the wrong is continuing ... is conclusory and must be evaluated in the light of the facts stated in the complaint and those adduced in support of, or against, the motion for summary judgment”
• “[I]f the statutory violation occurs as a result of a continuing policy, itself illegal, then the statute does not foreclose an action aimed at the . . . enforcement of the policy within the limitations period.”
• “[I]f the statutory violation occurs as a result of a continuing policy, itself illegal, then the statute [of limitations] does not foreclose an action aimed at the company’s enforcement of the policy within the limitations period.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).