Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that relief sought was not prospective where the “specific allegations targeted] past conduct” and the “remedy [was] not intended to halt a present, continuing violation of federal law”
• concluding that the Eleventh 6 Amendment barred former employees of a state agency from suing for discrimination under similar federal statute
• holding that a Rule 12(b)(1) motion is the proper mechanism for a defendant to raise the issue of whether Eleventh Amendment immunity bars federal jurisdiction
• concluding that relief sought was not prospective where the “specific allegations target[ed| past conduct” and the “remedy [was] not intended to halt a present, continuing violation of federal law’
• explaining that “the Eleventh Amendment is a jurisdictional bar which deprives federal courts of subject matter jurisdiction”
• noting that “the Eleventh Amendment is a jurisdictional bar which deprives federal courts of subject matter jurisdiction”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).