Henneberger v. County of Nassau

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the plaintiff did not have a property interest in increased compensation due under the collective bargaining agreement
• holding that the plaintiff did not have a property interest in increased compensation due under the collective bargaining agreement
• concluding that “the alleged deprivation in this case does not amount to a deprivation of a status characterized either by ‘extreme dependence’ or ‘permanence’ under [S&D Maintenance]”
• holding that plaintiffs stated a claim under the Equal Protection Clause where they alleged that they were treated differently than others similarly situated under a collective bargaining agreement “because of [their] age ... and political affiliation[s]”
• finding that “because plaintiffs failed to serve a timely notice of claim on the County, all of their state law claims against the individual defendants and the County are dismissed without prejudice”
• denying motion to dismiss selective enforcement claim where “plaintiffs allege that defendants lacked a ‘sufficiently compelling state interest to justify [the] disparity in treatment of similarly situated individuals’ ” (alteration in Henneberger )

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).