# Coger v. Board of Regents of Tennessee

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · April 4, 2000 · 209 F.3d 485

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6985420

## Case

- **Full name:** Dalvan M. COGER Joseph K. Davis Carolyn Thorpe Furr Lucille Golightly Thomas M. Hughes Janie S. Knight Chales E. Long, Jr. Harry Richard Mahood Ramona Madson Mahood Robert No. Marshall Betty Hull Owen June Rose Richie Steve Scesa 97-5134 Charles R. Schroeder Robert A. Snyder Bob J. Tucker Sharon L. Van Oteghen, William Welch, United States of America, Intervenor v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE, a Subdivision of the State of Tennessee Memphis State University, An Institution Operated by the State Board of Regents Thomas G. Carpenter, Individually and as President of Memphis State University Victor E. Feisal, Individually and as Vice-President of Academic Affairs at Memphis State University
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** April 4, 2000
- **Citations:** 209 F.3d 485
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Cole
- **Judges:** Cole, Jones, Moore
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6985420

## Opinion text

OPINION
COLE, Circuit Judge.
In our prior opinion in this case, Coger v. Board of Regents, 154 F.3d 296 , 307 (6th Cir.1998), we concluded that Congress intended to abrogate the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit by its enactment of the 1974 amendments to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq., and that it had the authority to do so pursuant to Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court, in a plurality opinion, now has determined that although the ADEA does contain a clear statement of Congress’ intent to abrogate the states’ immunity, the abrogation exceeded Congress’ authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. See Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents, — U.S. -, -, 120 S.Ct. 631, 649-50 , 145 L.Ed.2d 522 (2000).
Having carefully considered the present case.in light of Kimel , we conclude that the faculty members cannot maintain their ADEA suit against the University, a state employer. We therefore VACATE our prior judgment and AFFIRM the district court’s order dismissing the plaintiffs’ ADEA action. •

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6985420. Public record. Not legal advice.