Schallop v. New York State Department of Law

How courts have described this case

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

• holding when employment decisions are ‘based on variable, subjective criteria” it is appropriate to analyze them as a single 22 employment practice
• finding that official-capacity claims against two defendants who lacked authority to reinstate the plaintiff should be dismissed
• finding that Eleventh Amendment required dismissal of a claim under New York Human Rights Law against the Department of Law and Vacco and Flynn in their official capacities
• finding no personal involvement where the defendant’s testimony “indicate[d] that she was being informed of a decision that had been made without her involvement”
• claim for injunctive relief proper “where the state official has the authority to perform the required act.”
• the Ex parte Young exception to sovereign immunity does not authorize claims against officials for reinstatement where there are no allegations that the officials have authority to grant the plaintiff's request for reinstatement to former position

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).