Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Lee Meyerson v. The State of Arizona Arizona Board of Regents
Citations: 740 F.2d 684; 1 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 610; 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 21109; 35 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 34,740; 35 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 127Docket: 81-5996
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; June 26, 1984; Federal Appellate Court
Lee Meyerson, the plaintiff-appellant, alleged discrimination by Arizona State University, claiming violations of four federal statutes. The district court granted summary judgment against him, which was appealed. The Ninth Circuit previously affirmed the district court's decision on three claims but remanded Meyerson's section 504 claim of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 for further consideration following a Supreme Court ruling in Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Darrone. The Ninth Circuit noted that under the precedent set by Scanlon v. Atascadero State Hospital, a plaintiff could not maintain a private action under section 504 unless the federal financial assistance had the primary objective of providing employment, a point later clarified by the Supreme Court in Darrone. Consequently, the Ninth Circuit vacated the district court’s judgment on Meyerson's section 504 claim and remanded for further examination, affirming the rest of the district court's rulings. Additionally, the Ninth Circuit highlighted that the district court might have dismissed Meyerson's section 504 claim based on an insufficient connection between him and the federal funds received by the university, a matter that remains unexplored in the record. The court referenced the recent Supreme Court decision in Grove City College v. Bell, which discussed the definition of "program or activity" in the context of federal financial assistance, suggesting that the district court should evaluate the applicability of this case to Meyerson’s situation. The order concludes with the Ninth Circuit affirming parts of the lower court's ruling while vacating and remanding the section 504 claim for further review. Judge Ferguson concurred, providing additional context for the district court regarding the implications of federal funding in relation to Meyerson's claims.