David Demshki v. Richard Monteith Anthony Whitehurst Steven Sloan Heidi Arno Monteith for Senator Committee, and California Senate Rules Committee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Garrett applies to claims under Title V of the ADA when they are predicated on alleged violations of Title I
• holding that Garrett’s immunity holding must necessarily be extended to claims brought under Title V of the ADA, where the assertions are predicated on alleged violations of Title I.
• holding that sovereign immunity bars suit where Title V retaliation claim was predicated on Title I violation because Congress has not validly abrogated the 1 We grant Vartanian’s motion to take judicial notice (Dkt. No. 21
• finding that state was immune for ADA Title V retaliation claim predicated on Title I violation because state was immune for suit under Title I
• noting that sovereign immunity must be raised “early in the proceedings to provide fair warning to the plaintiff,” but determining that the sovereign’s assertion of Eleventh Amendment immunity in its answer was sufficient to preserve the defense in that case (cleaned up)
• Applying reasoning from Garrett, “Congress may not abrogate the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity from Title V claims” that “are predicated on alleged violations of Title I.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).