USCON AM-0011- ANNOTATIONS

Palila v. Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources: State Governments Fall Prey to the Endangered Species Act of 1973. 10 Ecology Law Quarterly 281.

Palila v. Department of Land and Natural Resources: "Taking" Under Section Nine of the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Comment. 4 UH L. Rev. 181.

Courts and the Cultural Performance: Native Hawaiians' Uncertain Federal and State Law Rights to Sue. 16 UH L. Rev. 1.

Patricia N. v. LeMahieu: Abrogation of State Sovereign Immunity Under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act After Board of Trustees v. Garrett. 24 UH L. Rev. 347.

Award of attorneys' fees to Legal Aid Society in civil rights action against State not prohibited. 611 F.2d 1302.

Congress may provide for award of attorneys' fees against state officials acting in their official capacities. 611 F.2d 1302.

Because true purpose of action was to recover from state treasury, failure to name State as defendant was immaterial to state defendants' Eleventh Amendment immunity. Framing of claim as action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 does not abrogate or "override" sovereign immunity. 693 F.2d 928.

State waived immunity where it participated in federally funded and regulated special education program for handicapped children. 727 F.2d 809.

Did not bar action to enjoin state officials from disbursing public funds to "Hawaiians". Principals of qualified immunity do not protect state officials from actions to enjoin exercise of authority under allegedly unconstitutional state law. 741 F.2d 1169.

State did not waive immunity from suit by native Hawaiian group; prospective injunctive relief proper for violation of federal law by state official. 764 F.2d 623.

Bars federal court from hearing suit against State in absence of consent in state law under which suit brought; university personnel shared State's immunity against suit. 791 F.2d 759.

Barred action against State for allegedly violating antitrust laws by entering into exclusive franchise contract for taxi service from airport. 810 F.2d 869.

The United States may bring suits against the State. 832 F.2d 1116.

Bars citizen's suits for retrospective relief (damages) against state official acting in official capacity. 902 F.2d 1395.

Native Hawaiians' claim that trustees of office of Hawaiian affairs violated Admission Act not barred where action was brought against trustees in their individual, rather than official, capacities. 928 F.2d 824.

Grants states immunity from retroactive monetary relief in federal court. 961 F.2d 852.

Barred inmate's suit against State and individual defendants in their official capacities, but not against individual defendants in their personal capacities. 15 F.3d 1463.

Barred suit against state officials in official capacities for alleged breach of trust in approving third party agreements permitting agricultural use of homelands by non-native Hawaiians where plaintiffs sought only retrospective relief. 45 F.3d 333.

Bars federal courts from deciding claims against state officials based solely on state law. 45 F.3d 333.

State officials sued in individual capacities were entitled to qualified immunity where they reasonably believed, based on their good faith reliance on substantial legal opinion, that third party agreements permitting agricultural use of homelands by non- native Hawaiians met the statutory standard. 45 F.3d 333.

Eleventh Amendment bar against some of the claims of an action originally brought in state court does not prevent removal of the action to federal court. 68 F.3d 331.

State employees entitled to 42 U.S.C. §1983 qualified immunity where plaintiff did not have clearly established parental right to be free from state child care intervention in the form of suggested counseling and drug testing. 68 F.3d 331.

Where plaintiff failed to show sufficient likelihood that state child protective services agency would violate plaintiff's privacy rights in the future, plaintiff lacked standing to seek injunctive relief against agency. 68 F.3d 331.

Court did not lack jurisdiction because of Eleventh Amendment. What plaintiffs objected to was not the mere occurrence of an allegedly unfair vote, but the State's decision to give effect to that vote; plaintiffs sought prospective, not retrospective, relief. 140 F.3d 1218.

Where defendants ("State") appealed denial of State's motion for partial summary judgment on question whether punitive damages are available against a state under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and urged panel to ground its subject matter jurisdiction in Cohen collateral order doctrine, State failed to satisfy third criterion of Cohen test, rendering district court's order denying State's motion an unappealable collateral order; State was not claiming sovereign immunity from suit in federal court; State invoked Eleventh Amendment merely as a defense to liability for punitive damages under Title II and Section 504. 165 F.3d 1257.

Did not bar plaintiffs' suits under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act or §504 of the Rehabilitation Act. 303 F.3d 1039.

Supreme Court's conclusion that a court of appeals has jurisdiction over a district court's non-final order denying a state's claim to Eleventh Amendment immunity under the collateral order doctrine applies whether or not an Ex Parte Young claim survives the motion stage of the litigation. 309 F.3d 1203.

Lawsuit against state officials by plaintiffs, Hawai`i medicaid recipients who suffered from tobacco-related illnesses, not barred by sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment, where plaintiffs alleged that the officials violated and continued to violate federal disbursement rules for medicaid recovery. 311 F.3d 929.

State of Hawaii was protected from suit by an individual, whether the individual was a citizen of another state or of Hawaii. 315 F. Supp. 729.

A suit to restrain unconstitutional act of state officer is not a suit against the State. 402 F. Supp. 95.

State could be enjoined from violating the Endangered Species Act and required to eradicate feral sheep and goats in critical habitat at state expense because Act expressly abrogates sovereign immunity under Eleventh Amendment. 471 F. Supp. 985.

Actions for injunctive and declaratory relief against state officials acting in their official capacity are not barred by Eleventh Amendment. 481 F. Supp. 1028.

State waived immunity by voluntarily coming into federal court when state courts also had jurisdiction. 531 F. Supp. 517.

State sovereign immunity does not bar an action when official's actions violated the Constitution. 751 F. Supp. 1401.

Bars inmate's claim for damages against state prison officials in their official capacities. 807 F. Supp. 1505.

State defendants’ motion for summary judgment granted on all claims against state officials in their official capacities, where Eleventh Amendment barred state law claims and plaintiffs sought only retrospective relief against the state officials. 824 F. Supp. 1480.

State had not waived its sovereign immunity, thus, plaintiffs’ claims against State or its agencies or departments were barred by the Eleventh Amendment. 824 F. Supp. 1480.

Barred plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. §1983 claim and pendent state law claims against State. 874 F. Supp. 1095.

Barred inmate's claims against State and defendants in their official capacities for alleged violations of state law and inmate's 42 U.S.C. §1983 claims for monetary relief against State and defendants in their official capacities. 902 F. Supp. 1220.

Inasmuch as plaintiff's claims under §378-2 against the State were against a state government, they were barred in federal court by Eleventh Amendment; plaintiff's claims against state officials in their official capacities must likewise be barred. 910 F. Supp. 479.

Plaintiff's claims for relief based on allegedly unconstitutional rule of professional conduct enforced by state officials, constituted an exception to Eleventh Amendment doctrine of sovereign immunity under Ex Parte Young. 916 F. Supp. 1525.

Barred plaintiffs' 42 U.S.C. §1983 claims for damages, where plaintiffs sought damages on grounds that State's QUEST health care program prior to April 1, 1996 violated equal protection clause of Fourteenth Amendment by discriminating against the blind and disabled. 939 F. Supp. 765.

Where plaintiffs argued that State waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity through the enactment of §353-14 and the State's Tort Claims Act [sic], §§662-2 and 663-1, no express consent or applicable waiver provisions found. 940 F. Supp. 1523.

Barred claims against defendant state agencies, federal constitutional claims brought under 42 U.S.C. §1983 against state officials in official capacities, and state law claims. 951 F. Supp. 1484.

No waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity, where defendants removed case to federal court and defendants raised immunity defense in their answer in state court and not in their motion for partial judgment on pleadings. 951 F. Supp. 1484.

Sections 661-1 and 662-2 did not constitute a waiver of defendants' Eleventh Amendment immunity; neither Native American Languages Act of 1990 nor 42 U.S.C. §1983 abrogated the Eleventh Amendment. 951 F. Supp. 1484.

Plaintiffs' suit barred by Eleventh Amendment and prior Ninth Circuit authority, where, inter alia, plaintiffs asked court to compel state defendants to spend §5(f) (Admission Act) funds on only one (Hawaiian home lands) of the five purposes provided for in the Admission Act, in order to compensate for past breaches of trust. 996 F. Supp. 989.

Where plaintiffs argued that defendant was not an arm of the State of Maryland and thus was unable to obtain protection through the Eleventh Amendment, defendant was vested with sovereign immunity. As there was no named state official in the complaint or elsewhere, that was allegedly violating plaintiffs' rights under federal law, plaintiffs' claims could not fall within exception which allowed suits to enjoin state officials from violating federal law. 3 F. Supp. 2d 1127.

Where plaintiffs asserted claims against defendant based upon Declaratory Judgment Act, and the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, as provided under the Defense Base Act, absent a clear statement that Congress intended to abrogate Eleventh Amendment immunity, such immunity remained intact and protected defendant from suit in federal court. 3 F. Supp. 2d 1127.

State and department of land and natural resources immune from suit, where plaintiff sought to enjoin State and city and county of Honolulu from implementation or enforcement of any and all state statutes and city ordinances that might apply to the business that plaintiff claimed to be developing, involving a commercial boating activity on the Ala Wai canal. 57 F. Supp. 2d 1028.

Barred plaintiff's tort claims and claims that defendants violated two constitutional amendments made actionable under 42 U.S.C. §1983, made against defendants State and Hawaii paroling authority ("HPA") parole administrator and HPA chairman in their official capacities. 109 F. Supp. 2d 1262.

Where defendants removed action to federal court, defendant State had not waived sovereign immunity; Eleventh Amendment barred plaintiff's claims against State and defendant-physicians in their official capacities. 109 F. Supp. 2d 1271.

Plaintiff's claims dismissed, on Eleventh Amendment immunity grounds, to extent they were asserted against defendants in their official capacities. 110 F. Supp. 2d 1312.

Defendants' motion to dismiss based on Eleventh Amendment immunity denied as to plaintiffs' claims against the State based on §504 of the Rehabilitation Act. 141 F. Supp. 2d 1243.

On and after July 1, 1998, the date §304-6 [as amended] took effect, the University of Hawaii continued to be an arm of the State for purposes of Eleventh Amendment immunity. 159 F. Supp. 2d 1211.

Defendants' motion to dismiss based on Eleventh Amendment immunity denied as to plaintiffs' claim under §504 of the Rehabilitation Act. 165 F. Supp. 2d 1144.

No Eleventh Amendment immunity for county in lawsuit based on county planning commission's denial of a special use permit sought under §205-6. 229 F. Supp. 2d 1056.

Requested relief that trust status of exchanged lands be restored by constructive trust is equivalent to nullification of the exchange and return of exchanged lands to trust res; as such, relief seeks compensation for past actions of state officials and is barred by State's sovereign immunity. 73 H. 578, 837 P.2d 1247.

Appellants' claims not barred by sovereign immunity where appellants' requested relief not a request for compensation for past action of Hawaiian homes commission members. 81 H. 474, 918 P.2d 1130.