Charlotte Klingler Charles Wehner Sheila Brashear v. Director, Department of Revenue, State of Missouri, United States of America, Amicus Curiae

281 F.3d 776, 12 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1504, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 2940, 2002 WL 272302
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 27, 2002
Docket00-1597
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 281 F.3d 776 (Charlotte Klingler Charles Wehner Sheila Brashear v. Director, Department of Revenue, State of Missouri, United States of America, Amicus Curiae) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Charlotte Klingler Charles Wehner Sheila Brashear v. Director, Department of Revenue, State of Missouri, United States of America, Amicus Curiae, 281 F.3d 776, 12 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1504, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 2940, 2002 WL 272302 (8th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After Charlotte Klingler and others filed suit against the director of the Department of Revenue of the state of Missouri, claiming that the fee charged for placards that allow use of accessible parking violated Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), see 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12165, the defendant moved to dismiss the case based on eleventh amendment immunity. The district court granted the motion and the plaintiffs appealed. We reverse in part and affirm in part.

In Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 155-56, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908), the Supreme Court held that eleventh amendment immunity was not available to state officials in suits seeking prospective injunctive relief for violations of federal law. See also Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 664, 667-68, 94 S.Ct. 1347, 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974). In Randolph v. Rodgers, 253 F.3d 342, 347-48 (8th Cir.2001), which we decided after the district court entered its judgment in this case, we held this principle applicable to non-employment claims based on Title II of the ADA. We therefore conclude that the plaintiffs here may seek declaratory and injunctive relief under Ex Parte Young. We believe, however, that Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle, 184 F.3d 999 (8th Cir.1999), bars the plaintiffs’ claim for monetary damages.

We therefore reverse the district court’s order dismissing the plaintiffs’ claim for declaratory and injunctive relief, but affirm its dismissal of the claim for damages, and we remand to the court for further proceedings.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Vanderford v. Schnell
D. Minnesota, 2023
Issaenko v. University of Minnesota
57 F. Supp. 3d 985 (D. Minnesota, 2014)
Klingler v. Director, Department of Revenue
455 F.3d 888 (Eighth Circuit, 2006)
Atwood v. Vilsack
338 F. Supp. 2d 985 (S.D. Iowa, 2004)
Simmang v. Texas Board of Law Examiners
346 F. Supp. 2d 874 (W.D. Texas, 2004)
VanHorn v. Nebraska State Racing Commission
304 F. Supp. 2d 1151 (D. Nebraska, 2004)
Evans v. Page
Appellate Court of Illinois, 2003
Miranda B. v. Kitzhaber
328 F.3d 1181 (Ninth Circuit, 2003)
Michael J. Hason, M.D. v. Medical Board of California Department of Consumer Affairs, State of California Arlene Adams, the Director of the Department of Consumer Affairs of the State of California Neil Fippin, Individually, & as the Manager, Licensing Program of the Medical Board of the State of California Melinda Acosta, Individually & as an Official of the Medical Board of the State of D.C. No. California Ron Joseph, Individually & as Executive Director of the Medical Board of the State of California & as Director of the Department of Consumer Affairs of the State of California Bruce Hasenkamp, Individually & as President of the Division of Licensing of the Medical Board of the State of California Ira Lubell, M.D., Individually & as President of the Division of Medical Quality of the Medical Board of the State of California Carole H. Hurvitz Anabel A. Imbert Raquel D. Arias, Dr. Klea D. Bertakis, Dr. Jack Bruner, Dr. Daniel Livingston Karen McElliot Alan E. Shumacher, Dr. Kip S. Skidmore, Individually & as Member of the Medical Board of the State of California's Division of Medical Quality Thomas A. Joas, Dr. Karen McElliott Individually & as Officer of the Medical Board of the State of California & Its Division of Licensing Bernard Alpert, Individually & as Officer of the Medical Board of the State of California & Its Division of Licensing Michael I. Sidley, Individually & as Executive of the Medical Board of the State of California's Division of Licensing Raja Toke, Dr., Individually & as Executive of the Medical Board of the State of California's Division of Licensing the State of California & Senior Investigator, Michael J. Hason, M.D. v. Medical Board of the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs, State of California Arlene Adams, the Director of the Department of Consumer Affairs of the State of California Neil Fippin, Individually and as the Manager, Licensing Program of the Medical Board of the State of California Melinda Acosta, Individually and as an Official of the Medical Board of the State of California Ron Joseph, Individually and as Executive Director of the Medical Board of the State of California and as Director of the Department of Consumer Affairs of the State of California Bruce Hasenkamp, Individually and as President of the Division of Licensing of the Medical Board of the State of California Ira Lubell, M.D., Individually and as President of the Division of Medical Quality of the Medical Board of the State of California Carole H. Hurvitz Anabel A. Imbert Raquel D. Arias, M.D. Klea D. Bertakis, M.D. Jack Bruner, M.D. Daniel Livingston Karen McElliott Alan E. Schumacher, M.D. Kip S. Skidmore, Individually and as Members of the Medical Board of the State of California's Division of Medical Quality Thomas A. Joas, M.D. Karen McElliott Individually and as Officer of the Medical Board of the State of California and Its Division of Licensing Bernard Alpert, Individually and as Officer of the Medical Board of the State of California and Its Division of Licensing Michael I. Sidley, Individually and as Executive of the Medical Board of the State of California's Division of Licensing Raja Toke, M.D., Individually and as Executive of the Medical Board of the State of California's Division of Licensing the State of California Senior Investigator Medical Board of California
294 F.3d 1166 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)
Hason v. Medical Board of California
294 F.3d 1166 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)
South Dakota Farm Bureau, Inc. v. Hazeltine
202 F. Supp. 2d 1020 (D. South Dakota, 2002)
Casey v. Riedel
195 F. Supp. 2d 1122 (S.D. Iowa, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
281 F.3d 776, 12 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1504, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 2940, 2002 WL 272302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charlotte-klingler-charles-wehner-sheila-brashear-v-director-department-ca8-2002.