Filed Date: Aug. 10, 1972
Closed Date: 1973
Clearinghouse coding complete
In 1972, plaintiff, a resident alien living in the City of Miami, Florida filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, challenging the validity of a Miami civil service rule which prevented the employment of aliens. Plaintiff alleged violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as class certification.
On October 24, 1972, the District Court (Judge Atkins) issued an order ruling on various pending motions. Judge Atkins (1) granted class certification, (2) dismissed the municipal entities from the lawsuit; (3) denied the individual defendants' request for a three-judge panel and (4) entered declaratory judgment in favor of plaintiff, finding that the Miami rule was unconstitutional. Mendoza v. City of Miami Civil Service Bd., 1972 WL 273 (Oct. 24, 1972 S.D. Fla.) The defendants appealed.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed, finding that the District Court properly found that the civil service rule excluding aliens from employment was unconstitutional, in light of the Supreme Court case. Sugarman v. Douglass, 413 U.S. 634, 93 S.Ct. 2842, 37 L.Ed.2d 853 (1973). The case was remanded for a determination of whether to award of attorney's fees for the prosecution of this appeal. Mendoza v. City of Miami, 483 F.2d 430 (5th Cir. 1973).
Summary Authors
Dan Dalton (11/12/2007)
Goldberg, Irving Loeb (Louisiana)
Roney, Paul Hitch (Florida)
Carlisle , Russel E. (Florida)
Rothstein, Alan H. (Florida)
Atkins, Carl Clyde (Florida)
Goldberg, Irving Loeb (Louisiana)
Roney, Paul Hitch (Florida)
Thornberry, William Homer (Texas)
Last updated April 2, 2024, 3:11 a.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: Florida
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Aug. 10, 1972
Closing Date: 1973
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
A class to be all permanent resident aliens residing in the City of Miami who, but for the enforcement of Rule V, Section 3, would otherwise be eligible to compete for employment by the City of Miami.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: Yes
Class Action Outcome: Granted
Defendants
City of Miami Civil Service Board (Miami), City
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens
Constitutional Clause(s):
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Issues
General:
Public benefits (includes, e.g., in-state tuition, govt. jobs)
Immigration/Border: