Peirick v. Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis Athletics Department

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a plaintiff could not proceed against the Board of Trustees of Indiana University “even on her claims for prospective injunctive relief”
• observing that the Athletics Department \is merely a division of the University that is not capable of being sued\
• observing that the Athletics Department \is merely a division of the University that is not capable of being sued\
• explaining that the analysis merges when the plaintiff argues that the employer is lying about elements required to establish prima facie case
• indicating that the “Board of Trustees of the University of [ilinois are state agencies with Eleventh Amendment immunity”
• cautioning that “[i]t is important not to lose sight of the ‘common sense’ aspect of this inquiry. It is not an unyielding, inflexible requirement that requires near one-to-one mapping between employees”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).