Skip to main content
Sixth Circuit· 3/21/1991

Dixon v. Anderson

Citations

  • 928 F.2d 212
  • 1991 WL 35778

How courts have described this case

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

  • discriminatory policy appeared plainly in the Ohio Revised Code and administrators openly adhered to this policy
  • repeated requests for further relief from a prior act of discrimination will not set the time limitation running anew
  • “The Supreme Court has held that a neutral system that merely perpetuates the effects of previous discrimination is not a continuing violation.”
  • “[Wjithout a specific, allegedly discriminatory act against [the plaintiffs] within the limitations period, mere existence of an alleged policy violating equal protection rights will not toll the running of the statute of limitations.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Jones, Ryan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

97 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

22 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Dixon v. Anderson

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

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.