Garrett v. University of Alabama

261 F.3d 1242
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedAugust 16, 2001
DocketNos. 98-6069, 98-6070
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 261 F.3d 1242 (Garrett v. University of Alabama) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Garrett v. University of Alabama, 261 F.3d 1242 (11th Cir. 2001).

Opinion

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before ANDERSON, Chief Judge, RONEY, Circuit Judge, and COOK*, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

This case is before the Court on remand from the United States Supreme Court, see Board of Trustees of the Univ. of Alabama v. Garrett, 531 U.S. 356, 121 S.Ct. [1244]*1244955, 148 L.Ed.2d 866 (2001), regarding the issue whether two Alabama state agencies were entitled to sovereign immunity regarding claims brought against them under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213. The district court in this case entered summary judgment in favor of the state agencies. Adhering to our intervening decision in Kimel v. State Bd. of Regents, 139 F.3d 1426, 1433 (11th Cir.1998), cert. granted, 525 U.S. 1121, 119 S.Ct. 901, 142 L.Ed.2d 901, cert. dismissed, 528 U.S. 1184, 120 S.Ct. 1236, 145 L.Ed.2d 1131 (2000), we held that the state is not immune from suit under the ADA and reversed the judgment of the district court against plaintiffs. See Garrett v. University of Ala. at Birmingham Bd. of Trustees, 193 F.3d 1214, 1218 (11th Cir.1999). The Supreme Court granted certiorari in this case to resolve a split among the Courts of Appeals on this question, and reversed our decision, holding that suits in federal court by state employees to recover money damages by reason of the state’s failure to comply with the ADA are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. In Garrett, we also held that the “decision under the Rehabilitation Act is also controlled by this Court’s decision as to the ADA in Kimel.” 193 F.3d at 1218. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court regarding both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act must be affirmed based on the Supreme Court’s decision.

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
261 F.3d 1242, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garrett-v-university-of-alabama-ca11-2001.