Re: The insolence of Office; Hoisting them on their own Petards

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ken Smith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Merlin wrote:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry) wrote:
>> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >For starters, read the eleventh amdendment. (Which I assumed you knew,
Merlin :))
>> >
>> ><http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment11/>
>>
>>         Thanks,  Rightly cited.  The OP is in for some big fun now!
>
>  While you two are busy congratulating yourselves on your combined
>"how in the hell did you pass the Bar, anyway?" knowledge of the law
>in this area, you seem to forget that it is not the state, but state officials,
>who are the actual tortfeasors in this arena.  If you want state officials
>to do their job, you sue the state; if you prefer to punish them for their
>misconduct in the business end, you sue them personally.

Umm, Kenny, read Ex Parte Young.  A suit against a state official will
affect state revenues (i.e. you're seeking damages) then it will be
treated as a suit against the sovereign state, even if the state officials
are personally named as defendants.  Unless you can show they somehow
acted outside of the scope of their authority.