Skip to main content
· 2/24/2011

Cole v. Milwaukee Area Technical College District

Citations

  • 634 F.3d 901
  • 31 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1688
  • 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 3623
  • 2011 WL 650715

How courts have described this case

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

  • “[I]n any due process case where the deprivation of property is alleged, the threshold question is whether a protected property interest actually exists.”
  • “[I]n any due process case where the deprivation of property is alleged, the threshold question is whether a protected property interest actually exists.”
  • “The consideration of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion is restricted to the pleadings, which consist here of the complaint, any exhibits attached thereto, and the supporting briefs.”
  • “To have a protectable 18 No. 20-1868 property interest in a benefit … a plaintiff must have more than an ‘abstract need or desire for it’ and more than a ‘uni- lateral expectation of it.’” (quoting Roth, 408 U.S. at 577)
  • “To have a protectable 18 No. 20-1868 property interest in a benefit … a plaintiff must have more than an ‘abstract need or desire for it’ and more than a ‘uni- lateral expectation of it.’” (quoting Roth, 408 U.S. at 577)
  • “To have a protectable 18 No. 20-1868 property interest in a benefit … a plaintiff must have more than an ‘abstract need or desire for it’ and more than a ‘uni- lateral expectation of it.’” (quoting Roth, 408 U.S. at 577)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Flaum, Wood, McCuskey

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.