Skip to main content
· 7/10/2000

Sturdevant v. Paulsen

Citations

  • 218 F.3d 1160
  • 2000 Colo. J. C.A.R. 4215
  • 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 15846
  • 78 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 40,140
  • 2000 WL 943421

How courts have described this case

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

  • declining to conclusively resolve the interplay between the Risk Management Fund and the state’s legal liability
  • noting the “overlap” between the question of whether a judgment against an entity would be satisfied out of a state’s treasury and issues of the entity’s financial independence through receipt of state funding and any ability to issue bonds and levy taxes
  • entity’s lack of taxing authority ultimately tipped the balance towards a finding of arm-of-the-state status
  • “... a fundamental characteristic of a political subdivision [is] political control by some community other than the state as a whole.”
  • “[T]he Board enjoys Eleventh Amendment immunity as an instrumentality or ‘arm’ of the State of Colorado.”
  • “the inquiry . . . is whether [the entity] is more like a county or city than . . . like an arm of the state” (quotation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Seymour, Lucero, Ellison

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.