Damien Marino v. Anthony Ameruso, Commissioner of the Department of Transportation of the City of New York

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that if an administrative law judge were to make an evidentiary error of a constitutional magnitude, the error would be categorized as a random and unauthorized act by a state actor
• dismissing inmate’s claim in § 1983 action for deprivation of legal documents and medical records
• no procedural due process claim where the sole issue was an allegedly erroneous evidentiary ruling where adequate state procedures were available to correct the error
• “Although one need not exhaust state remedies before bringing a Section 1983 action claiming a violation of procedural due process, one must nevertheless prove as an element of that claim that state procedural remedies are inadequate.”
• “Although one need not exhaust state remedies before bringing a Section 1983 action claiming a violation of procedural due process, one must nevertheless prove as an element of that claim that state procedural remedies are inadequate.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).