State v. Roalson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that inadmissible statements in affidavits submitted in support of summary judgment motion are incapable of raising material issues of fact
• holding that eonclusory and unsupported assertions by plaintiff are insufficient to withstand a motion for summary judgment on a section 1983 claim
• recognizing that standards from Title VII are applied in the Section 1981 and Equal Protection Clause context
• holding that conclusory assertions in supporting affidavit did not create genuine issue of fact
• concluding that to establish a policy, custom, or practice a plaintiff must show that the conduct was so “persistent or widespread” as to constitute “a custom or usage with the force of law” (citation omitted)
• noting that “individuals are not subject to liability under Title VII,” including “individual defendants with supervisory control over a plaintiff” (citations and quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).