“Under Rule 54(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a court can grant any relief to which a prevailing party is entitled, whether or not that relief was expressly sought in the complaint. The sole exception to this rule is where a court grants relief not requested and of which the opposing party has no notice, thereby prejudicing that party. In such case, unasked for relief should not be granted.” (internal citations omitted)
How later courts described this case
- “Under Rule 54(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a court can grant any relief to which a prevailing party is entitled, whether or not that relief was expressly sought in the complaint. The sole exception to this rule is where a court grants relief not requested and of which the opposing party has no notice, thereby prejudicing that party. In such case, unasked for relief should not be granted.” (internal citations omitted)
- "The ADA, which serves to protect the rights of individuals with disabilities, states that a disabled individual is one who suffers from 'a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual'"
- “Since the standards adopted by Titles II and III of the ADA are, in most cases, the same as those required under the Rehabilitation Act . . . we consider the merits of these claims together.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ERRATA
The opinion of this Court issued on April 7, 2004, cited at 364 F.3d 79 is corrected as follows:
At Slip Op. 2672 [ 364 F.3d at 85 ] delete last sentence on the page:
“Because both UConn and the National Board receive federal funding, they are subject to the provisions of the Rehabilitation Act.”