Mansourian v. Regents of University of California

How courts have described this case

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

• approving a class of female wrestlers “on behalf of all current and future female” university students
• noting that “[o]ur discretion to affirm on grounds other than those relied on by the district court” is generally extended only to “issues raised in a manner providing the district court an opportunity to rule on it”
• finding defendant 27 educational institution’s “EADA reports contain[ed] ample data demonstrating that it could not 28 satisfy the substantial proportionality option”
• “Funding recipients can satisfy any of the three options to comply 17 with Title IX.”
• refusing to affirm a dismissal on the alternative ground of qualified immunity because the defendants had not raised qualified immunity in their dispositive motions
• “Funding recipients can satisfy any of the three options to comply 19 with Title IX.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).