Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Raygor v. Regents of the University of Minnesota

Docket No.: 00-1514
Certiorari Granted: Jun 4 2001
Argued: November 26, 2001
Decided: February 27, 2002

Topics:

28 U.S.C. 1367, Judicial Power, ADEA, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Anti-Injunction Act, Article I, Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy Code, Civil Procedure, Civil Rights Act, Civil Rights Act of 1964, Commerce Clause, Compensation, Comprehensive Environmental Response, Discrimination in Employment, Due Process, Eighth Amendment, Eleventh Amendment, Employee Retirement Income Security Act, False Claims Act, Fourteenth Amendment, Natural Resources, Supremacy Clause, Tenth Amendment, Title VII, abuse of discretion, and Liability Act of 1980, copyright, habeas, habeas corpus, immigration, immunity from suit, murder, preemption, privacy, res judicata, sovereign immunity

PartyNames: Lance Raygor and James Goodchild v. Regents of the University of Minnesota, et al.
Petitioner: Lance Raygor and James Goodchild
Respondent: Regents of the University of Minnesota, et al.

Court Below: Supreme Court of Minnesota
Supreme Court Docket

Lance Raygor and James Goodchild
v.
Regents of the University of Minnesota, et al.
534 U.S. 533 (2002)
Question:

Does the federal supplemental jurisdiction statute's tolling provision apply to claims filed in federal court against nonconsenting States?

Raygor v. Regents of the University of Minnesota
ORAL ARGUMENT

November 26, 2001

Holding: affirmed
Decision: Decision: 6 votes for Regents of the University of Minnesota, 3 vote(s) against
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)