DAVISON

v.

FLORIDA

Citator

Cited By

• Clark v. Whiting, 607 F.2d 634 (4th Cir. 1979)
  …sion” on that ground. Colm v. Vance (D.C. Cir. 1977) 196 U.S.App.D.C. 132, 137, 567 F. 2d 1125, 1130;14 Schwartz v. Thompson (2d Cir. 1974) 497 F. 2d 430, 432; Koscherak v. Schmeller (S.D.N.Y.1973) 363 F.Supp. 932, 936 (three-judge court) aff. mem., 415 U.S. 943, 94 S.Ct. 1462, 39 L.Ed.2d 560; Olson v. Trustees of California State Universities (C.D. Cal. 1972) 351 F.Supp. 430, 432.15 Moreover, any contention that refusal to promote is sufficiently stigmatic to constitute a deprivation of liberty, giving ris…
• Colm v. Cyrus R. Vance, 567 F.2d 1125 (D.C. Cir. 1977)
  ….,” or where there is a “common law” of promotion sufficient to create a de facto “right” to promotion.6 Schwartz v. Thompson, 497 F. 2d at 433. See also Koscherak v. Schmeller, 363 F.Supp. 932, 935-36 (S.D.N.Y.1973) (three-judge court), aff’d mem., 415 U.S. 943, 94 S.Ct. 1462, 39 L.Ed.2d 560 (1974); Olson v. Trustees of California State Universities, 351 F.Supp. 430, 433-35 (C.D.Cal.1972). What sets our present case apart from these other reported nonpromotion cases is that continuing nonpromotion throug…
• Schwartz v. Marttie Louis Thompson, 497 F.2d 430 (2d Cir. 1974)
  …as a CALS staff attorney is an important consideration; but it is far from a complete qualification for the supervisory position of litigation director. Compare, Koseherak v. Sehmeller, 363 F.Supp. 932, 935-936 (S.D.N.Y.1973, 3-judge court), aff’d, 415 U.S. 943, 94 S.Ct. 1462, 39 L.Ed.2d 560, 42 U.S.L.W. 3480 (1974). Nor is there any suggestion that the vast majority of staff attorneys are promoted to supervisory positions so as to create a de facto “right” to such advancement. Compare, Perry v. Sinderman…