Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

CAROLYN C. CLEVELAND v. POLICY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS CORPORATION et al. (1999)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
CAROLYN C. CLEVELAND v. POLICY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS CORPORATION et al.
Term: 1998
Important Dates
Argued: February 24, 1999
Decided: May 24, 1999
Outcome
Vacated and remanded
Vote
9-0
Majority
Stephen BreyerRuth Bader GinsburgAnthony KennedySandra Day O'ConnorWilliam RehnquistAntonin ScaliaDavid SouterJohn Paul StevensClarence Thomas

CAROLYN C. CLEVELAND v. POLICY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS CORPORATION et al. is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on May 24, 1999. The case was argued before the court on February 24, 1999.

In a 9-0 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the ruling of the lower court and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion. The case originated from the Texas Northern U.S. District Court.

For a full list of cases decided in the 1990s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Rehnquist Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Civil Rights - handicapped, rights of: under Rehabilitation, Americans with Disabilities Act, and related statutes
  • Petitioner: Disabled person or disability benefit claimant
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: employer. If employer's relations with employees are governed by the nature of the employer's business (e.g., railroad, boat), rather than labor law generally, the more specific designation is used in place of Employer.
  • Respondent state: Unknown
  • Citation: 526 U.S. 795
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Cert
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: William Rehnquist
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: Stephen Breyer

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as liberal.

See also

External links

Footnotes