Skip navigation
Prison Legal News
× You've used up your 3 free articles for this month. Subscribe today.

Individual Capacity Claims Not Applicable to RA and ADA

Loaded on Aug. 15, 1999 published in Prison Legal News August, 1999, page 16
Filed under: Disabled Prisoners, Civil Procedure, Defenses, Class Certification, Americans with Disabilities Act, Rehabilitation Act, Qualified Immunity. Location: Colorado.
Afederal district court in Colorado held that individual defendants in their individual capacities are not liable under the Rehabilitation Act (RA) or the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Additionally, these defendants were held to be entitled to qualified immunity from § 1983 claims under the Acts.

In 1992, Jessie Montez, ...

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login

More from this issue:

  1. "Victims' Rights" as a Stalkinghorse for State Repression, by Paul Wright
  2. No Equal Justice: Race and Class in the American Criminal Justice System, by David Cole (Review), by Alex Friedmann
  3. From the Editor, by Paul Wright
  4. PLN Sues Alabama DOC Over Gift Subscription Ban
  5. Notes from the Unrepenitentiary, by Laura Whitehorn
  6. Prison-Industrial Complex Conferences Are Spreading the Word, by Hans Sherrer
  7. Kentucky Jail Settles Strip Search Suit for $11.5 Million
  8. Washington 35% Law Struck Down by State Court
  9. Washington Legislature Amends 35% Law, Again, by Paul Wright
  10. Washington DOC Illegally Penalizes Indigents
  11. Class Action Suits Challenge Rip-Off Prison and Jail Phone Rates
  12. FCC Requires Rate Disclosure for Prison Phones
  13. Kentucky Utilities Commission Reduces Prison and Jail Phone Rates
  14. Warden Used "Force" in Sexual Assault
  15. Private Prison Operators Enter Medical Care Market, by Alex Friedmann
  16. Jury Awards Beaten Texas Prisoner $250,000
  17. Physical Injury Rule Applied to Pre-PLRA Asbestos Exposure
  18. CCA Settles Youngstown Suit for $2.48 Million
  19. Attorney Fees Must Be Expressly Reserved
  20. PLN Sues Utah Jail over "Bulk Mail" Ban
  21. First Amendment Guarantees Kosher Meals
  22. Frivolous Qualified Immunity Appeals Warrant Sanctions
  23. Individual Capacity Claims Not Applicable to RA and ADA
  24. Franklin Reversed; DC Prisoners Have No Right to Qualified Interpreters
  25. No Qualified Immunity for Texas Sheriff and CCRI Guards Who Abused Missouri Prisoners
  26. No Liberty Interest in Illinois Parole Laws
  27. BOP Erred in Denying Early Release Eligibility
  28. Denial of Pain Medication Violates Eighth Amendment
  29. Motive Question Precludes Summary Judgment in Medical Suit
  30. Tarrant County Jail's Christian Education Unit May Violate Texas and Federal Establishment Clauses
  31. Iowa Ban on Tapes with Parental Warning Upheld, by Paul Wright
  32. AA Probation Requirement Continues to Violate Establishment Clause
  33. Pro Se IFP Litigant Entitled to Amend Suit in Second Circuit
  34. California Guard Union Doles Out Millions to Politicians
  35. PLRA Consent Decree Termination Provision Upheld by 2nd and 3rd Circuits
  36. Costs Imposed Regardless of Ability to Pay
  37. PLRA Attorney Fee Cap Applies in $65,000 Beating Case
  38. Heck Doesn't Apply After Release from Prison
  39. No Administrative Exhaustion Requirement for Ex-Prisoners
  40. PLRA Doesn't Require Notice of Claim for Exhaustion
  41. Contaminated Water Claim Not Barred by PLRA Physical Injury Rule
  42. BOP Warden Held in Contempt for Failure to Forward PLRA Filing Fee
  43. Seventh Circuit Clarifies Good Faith Appeal Standard, Again
  44. News in Brief
  45. Alabama Jail Injuction Dissolved

More from these topics: