Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Schuster v. New York, 1977 — 434 U.S. 910 · caselaw · US
General
Schuster v. New York
434 U.S. 910·Supreme Court of the United States·1977
Mr. Justice Marshall would grant certiorari.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 76-6916.
Schuster v. New York.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
Mr. Justice Marshall would grant certiorari.
[DISSENT — Mr. Justice Brennan,]
Mr. Justice Brennan,
dissenting.
This suit is brought by a New York citizen against New York officials. In that circumstance it is my view that New York may not invoke the Eleventh Amendment, since that Amendment in terms bars only federal court suits against States by citizens of other States. Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U. S. 651, 687 (1974) (Brennan, J., dissenting). I would grant the petition and reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals.