J. M. Ceballos & Co. v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that it was “exceedingly likely that plaintiffs may not employ § 1983 to assert statutory violations of the ADA or Rehabilitation Act,” but finding that ADA and Rehabilitation Act claims did not preclude simultaneous constitutional claims brought under § 1983
• stating that a single systemwide illegal practice or policy may satisfy the commonality requirement
• finding commonality in Title II case where detainees alleged system-wide failure to accommodate deaf and hearing-impaired inmates
• finding common- ality in Title II case where detainees alleged system-wide failure to accom- modate deaf and hearing-impaired inmates
• finding commonality based upon Illinois Department of Corrections’ systemwide policies regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing inmates
• declining to include unidentified class members in the class definition because the class was not reasonably ascertainable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).