Hershel R. Stanley v. Jon E. Litscher, Secretary, Wisconsin Department of Corrections

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiff stated claim for retaliatory transfer even though no liberty interest involved in transfer
• holding that plaintiff stated claim for retaliatory transfer even though no liberty interest involved in transfer
• concluding in agreement “with the fourth, ninth, and eleventh circuits that the Rehabilitation Act is enforceable in federal court against recipients of federal largess” since the statute properly conditions states’ receipt of funds upon waiver of immunity
• “The Supreme Court has held that the ADA applies to prisons and its reasoning is equally applicable to the Rehabilitation Act.” (citation omitted)
• “We … agree … that the Rehabilitation Act is enforceable in federal court against recipients of federal largess.”
• no right to participate in rehabilitation program for sexual offenders

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).