Premo

Premo v. Martin

Good Law
119 F.3d 764·97 Daily Journal DAR 8907·1997 WL 381146·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 17359·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5496
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 11, 1997No. 96-55456California3,661 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Nelson, J.

Brenda Premo, in her official capacity as the Director of the California Department of Rehabilitation (the “State”), appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Jeana Martin, the United States Department of Education, and Secretary of Education Richard Riley. Martin, formerly a blind vendor licensed under the Randolph-Sheppard Vending Stand Act (the “Act”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 107 -107f, invoked the arbitration provisions of the Act in order to resolve a dispute between herself and the Department of Rehabilitation. An arbitration panel convened by the United States Department of Education awarded Martin damages, injunctive relief, and attorney’s fees. The State subsequently brought suit in federal district court, claiming that the Eleventh Amendment prohibits Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panels from awarding compensatory relief. In the alternative, the State argued that the arbitration proceedings violated due process. Martin counterclaimed, seeking judicial enforcement of the award. The State responded that the Eleventh Amendment bars the enforcement of such awards in federal court. The district court granted Martin’s motion for summary judgment. We have jurisdiction…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.