Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Head v. Jellico Housing Authority, 870 F.2d 1117 (1989)

Citation
Head v. Jellico Housing Authority, 870 F.2d 1117 (1989)
Parent Document
Head v. Jellico Housing Authority, 870 F.2d 1117 (1989)
Effective Date
1989-03-27

Other Sections in This Document (72)

Full Text

764 chars
64
Appellant Head argues that the district court misconstrued the holding of Hagans v. Lavine and denied her motion to amend her complaint based on faulty legal analysis. Head's argument has some merit. In Hagans, 415 U.S. 543, 94 S.Ct. at 1382, the Supreme Court held that given a constitutional and a statutory claim, "[t]he latter was to be decided first and the former not reached if the statutory claim was dispositive." "Dispositive" in this context must mean resolved in favor of the plaintiff. See Id. at 549-50, 94 S.Ct. at 1385-86. In the instant case, the statutory claim was not resolved in favor of plaintiff; therefore, it was not dispositive. For this reason, Hagans does not support the district court's failure to allow amendment of the complaint.