ARNETT, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, ET AL.
v.
KENNEDY ET AL.; CALERO-TOLEDO ET AL. V. PEARSON YACHT LEASING CO.; GAMBINO V. UNITED STATES; BIGHEART V. PAPPAN; WALLS V. UNITED STATES; WALDEN ET VIR V. UNITED STATES; PFEIFER ET AL. V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE UPPER SANDUSKY EXEMPTED VILLAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT
ARNETT, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, ET AL.
KENNEDY ET AL.; CALERO-TOLEDO ET AL. V. PEARSON YACHT LEASING CO.; GAMBINO V. UNITED STATES; BIGHEART V. PAPPAN; WALLS V. UNITED STATES; WALDEN ET VIR V. UNITED STATES; PFEIFER ET AL. V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE UPPER SANDUSKY EXEMPTED VILLAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT
417 U.S. 977
Supreme Court of the United States (1974)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 13 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
United States v. A Single Fam. Residence & Real Prop. Located AT 900 RIO Vista BLVD., 803 F.2d 625 (11th Cir. 1986)…s held that seizure for purposes of forfeiture presents an extraordinary situation justifying postponement of notice and hearing. Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co., 416 U.S. 663, 679-80, 94 S.Ct. 2080, 2089-91, 40 L.Ed.2d 452, reh’g denied, 417 U.S. 977, 94 S.Ct. 3187, 41 L.Ed.2d 1148 (1974). Under Calero-Toledo, it is well settled that no prior judicial determination that seizure is justified is required when the government seizes items subject to forfeiture. United States v. $8,850.00 in United…
-
Laymon Wesley Alsbury v. The United States Postal Serv., 530 F.2d 852 (9th Cir. 1976)…uently to discharge were improper because they were made by a person so involved in the case as to be incapable of impartiality. We believe these contentions are foreclosed by Arnett v. Kennedy, 416 U.S. 134, 94 S.Ct. 1633, 40 L.Ed.2d 15, reh. den., 417 U.S. 977, 94 S.Ct. 3187, 41 L.Ed.2d 1148 (1974), which held procedures similar to those employed here not violative of a federal employee’s due process rights.3 The Supreme Court ex [*855] pressly held that a pre-dismissal trial-type hearing was not constitu…
-
Garraghty v. Jordan, 830 F.2d 1295 (4th Cir. 1987)…ment be given notice of the charges against him and a meaningful opportunity to respond to those charges prior to his discharge. Loudermill, 105 S.Ct. at 1495; Arnett v. Kennedy, 416 U.S. 134, 170-71, 94 S.Ct. 1633, 1652, 40 L.Ed.2d 15 reh’g denied, 417 U.S. 977, 94 S.Ct. 3187, 41 L.Ed.2d 1148 (1974). The deprivation caused by Garraghty’s five day suspension was much less severe than the deprivation caused by a discharge, but “the length and consequent severity of a deprivation, while another factor to we…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence