Mard v. Town of Amherst

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that plaintiff “could have turned to the statute . . . if she was unclear about the reason for the Town’s request”
• explaining that “[t]he purpose of notice under the Due Process Clause is to apprise the affected individual of, and permit adequate preparation for,” the opportunity to be heard (quoting Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div. v. Craft, 436 U.S. 1, 14 (1978))
• finding, where decision turns on evaluation of medical evidence, town employee’s due process rights not violated by first providing independent medical examination rather than more formal administrative hearing, when followed by adequate post-termination procedures
• “Mard therefore could have turned to the statute ... if she was unclear about the reason for the Town’s request to attend an Independent Medical Examination.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).