The Supreme Court in Hess v. Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation (1994) 513 U.S. 30 115 S. Ct. 394, 130 L. Ed. 2d 245 (hereafter Hess) noted, ". . . Courts of Appeals have recognized the vulnerability of the State's purse as the most salient factor in Eleventh Amendment determinations." (Id., at p. 48 115 S. Ct. at p. 404.) The court later noted that the "prevailing view" was that " 'whether any judgment must be satisfied out of the state treasury' " was " 'the most important consideration' in resolving an Eleventh Amendment immunity issue." (Id., at p. 51 115 S. Ct. at p. 406.) The court based its emphasis on the state treasury factor on the fact that the "impetus for the Eleventh Amendment" was "the prevention of federal-court judgments that must be paid out of a State's treasury." (Id., at p. 48 115 S. Ct. at p. 404.) The court stopped short of saying the state treasury factor was conclusive, but noted that the briefs filed by the states involved in the case before it stated the vast majority of federal circuits had generally accorded the factor " 'dispositive weight.' " (Id., at p. 49 115 S. Ct. at p. 405.)