holding that SEPTA was not the “Commonwealth” and not entitled to immunity under the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution
Summary of this case from Se. Pa. Transp. Auth. v. City of Phila.No. 91-7813.
May 26, 1992.
C.A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 953 F. 2d 807.
holding that SEPTA was not the “Commonwealth” and not entitled to immunity under the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution
Summary of this case from Se. Pa. Transp. Auth. v. City of Phila.criticizing counsel who did not attempt to contact family members or prepare for the penalty phase until the trial was underway, and who failed to put on any mental health mitigating evidence
Summary of this case from Borden v. AllenFull title:BOLDEN v. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Court:U.S.
Date published: May 26, 1992
Not even the instructions of a defendant to ignore possible defenses can reasonably excuse counsel from the…
Hess v. Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corp.On this basis, [the entity] is ill-deserving of Eleventh Amendment protection."); Bolden v. Southeastern Pa.…