1,015 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,841 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The court held that res judicata bars a federal constitutional claim if it is based on the same asserted wrong as a prior state action, even if not raised in state court.
-
The dissenting judge holds that state prisoners challenging parole procedures must first exhaust state remedies and then pursue habeas corpus, not a § 1983 action.
-
505 F.2d 977·
2d Cir.·
1974-10-04
·cited 30×
The court held that a prisoner transferred to another facility without a hearing may have been denied due process if the transfer was punitive, and the mere fact of dislocation can constitute sufficient hardship.
-
The dissent argues that the court lacks jurisdiction because there is no actual case or controversy, as the defendants have no adverse legal interest in the constitutionality of the statutes at issue.
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action for lack of prosecution, affirming the dismissal.
-
A state high school league rule prohibiting females from participating with males in interscholastic athletics violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
A county Public Defender, created under Pennsylvania statute, enjoys immunity from liability under the Civil Rights Act, even if acting under color of law.
-
Federal law enforcement officers do not have immunity from damage suits for constitutional violations if they act without good faith and probable cause.
-
The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that federal courts should abstain from deciding a constitutional challenge to a local ordinance when state courts can resolve the underlying state law issues, and that federal courts are generally prohibited from enjoining pending state
-
A stockholder cannot maintain a Civil Rights action in his own name for damages suffered by the corporation, even if he owns all the stock.
-
The court held that a prisoner's complaint alleging negligent failure to protect from a fellow inmate's attack, without more, does not state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
The court held that a city annexation ordinance and its enabling state act were constitutional and that the plaintiff's claims were barred by res judicata.
-
The magistrate did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion to amend the complaint, excluding certain testimony, or denying the inmate's presence at trial, and the factual findings were not clearly erroneous.
-
855 F.2d 167·
4th Cir.·
1988-08-19
·cited 29×
The court held that a public employee's resignation is voluntary, and thus not a deprivation of property triggering due process protections, if it is not induced by employer misrepresentation or coercion, and the employee's reliance on any alleged misrepresentation is not reasona
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under RICO or 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because the alleged association lacked continuity for a RICO enterprise and the defendants' actions did not constitute state action for the § 1983 claim.
-
The dissenting judge argues that the evidence was insufficient to support findings of municipal liability and a First Amendment violation, and that a new trial on damages is warranted due to an improper jury instruction.
-
The court held that Section 29-100(b)(2) of the Gainesville Sign Ordinance is facially unconstitutional due to overbreadth and vagueness, and that the petitioner has standing to challenge it.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's section 1983 claims were barred for failure to comply with the Virgin Islands Tort Claims Act notice requirements.
-
707 F.2d 1262·
11th Cir.·
1983-06-23
·cited 29×
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no abuse of discretion in denying a jury trial, admitting a deposition due to witness unavailability, vitiating work product privilege due to unprofessional conduct, or in dismissing the case based on evidence of justificatio
-
693 F.2d 359·
5th Cir.·
1982-11-22
·cited 29×
The court held that the district court erred by failing to consider the strength of the evidence of the Sheriff's guilt when determining if the prosecution was in good faith, and that the finding of retaliation was clearly erroneous.
-
The majority opinion reversed the trial court's decision, allowing evidence of a deputy sheriff's prior acts to be admissible for proving gross negligence and proximate cause in a civil rights action, despite the dissenting judge's view that such evidence was irrelevant and preju
-
The court held that the prisoner's beliefs and practices associated with the MOVE organization did not constitute a religion protected by the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause.
-
648 F.2d 411·
5th Cir.·
1981-06-19
·cited 29×
The court held that the employee had a protectable property interest in his job, entitling him to due process before demotion.
-
A plaintiff need not prove intentional or reckless action by an official if the official failed to follow a mandatory duty or court order.
-
The court held that supervisory prison officials were not liable for deliberate indifference based on a single incident, but affirmed the judgment against the guards directly involved in the assault.
-
The court held that the pension plan's higher contribution requirement for women, based on presumed longevity, constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under the Equal Pay Act, distinguishing it from prior Supreme Court rulings on disability benefits.
-
432 F.2d 493·
9th Cir.·
1970-09-17
·cited 29×
The court held that the district court properly dismissed the complaint, refusing to convene a three-judge court, as there was no genuine threat of irreparable harm or chilling effect on First Amendment rights to warrant injunctive relief.
-
45 So. 3d 444·
Fla.·
2010-07-01
·cited 28×
Dolan Darling, a death-row inmate, challenged Florida's lethal injection protocol, the constitutionality of statutes prohibiting disclosure of executioners' identities, and whether Capital Collateral Regional Counsel (CCRC) attorneys could represent him in federal section 1983 cl
-
Primera Iglesia Bautista Hispana, a religious corporation, challenged Broward County's denial of a zoning variance to operate a church on property subject to a 1,000-foot separation requirement for nonagricultural, nonresidential uses in an agricultural zoning district. The Eleve
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction against an English-only rule, finding a likelihood of success on the merits under Title VII and the possibility of irreparable injury. It also held that the judges were not ent
-
The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands is not immune from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but the plaintiff suffered no cognizable constitutional injury, thus the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict should have been granted.
-
828 F.2d 1385·
9th Cir.·
1987-09-24
·cited 28×
The court should not distinguish between state and federal judges regarding judicial immunity from prospective injunctive relief.
-
The court held that guilty pleas were admissible as admissions of resistance and that the failure to object contemporaneously at trial after an unsuccessful motion in limine did not waive the appeal issue. The court also dismissed the appeal regarding the marijuana due to an inco
-
The court held that the plaintiff's allegations sufficiently stated a claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs under the Fourteenth Amendment, and that claims against the county and supervisors could be based on official policy or custom.
-
The court held that while the plaintiff's suit was frivolous and defendants were entitled to fees, the district court failed to adequately determine if all hours billed were reasonably expended in light of the frivolous nature of the claims. The court remanded for further finding
-
The court held that a city cannot be held liable under § 1983 solely based on an individual official's act if that act does not represent an official city policy or custom.
-
734 F.2d 691·
11th Cir.·
1984-06-18
·cited 28×
The court held that a governmental entity must be joined as a defendant in a § 1983 action to be held liable for attorney's fees, even if otherwise immune.
-
716 F.2d 1109·
6th Cir.·
1983-09-15
·cited 28×
-
669 F.2d 1297·
8th Cir.·
1982-02-11
·cited 28×
The court held that the trial court's findings of fact were insufficient to allow for intelligent appellate review of the defendants' state of mind.
-
A prisoner's release of civil rights claims is valid only if voluntary, deliberate, and informed, requiring a showing at least as strong as that for maritime releases.
-
A judge acting in excess of jurisdiction, but not in the clear absence of all jurisdiction, is protected by judicial immunity from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Attorney's fees awards require specific findings of fact and conclusions of law.
-
The maternity leave policies requiring pregnant teachers to cease teaching at mandatory times violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment under Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur. School board members sued in their individual capacities are entitled to qualif
-
586 F.2d 848·
1st Cir.·
1978-09-28
·cited 28×
The court held that the Younger abstention doctrine did not bar the federal action because the plaintiff lacked an adequate remedy in the Commonwealth courts for his pretrial detention claim, and the denial of certiorari was not a decision on the merits.
-
571 F.2d 1263·
4th Cir.·
1978-02-14
·cited 28×
The dissenting judge believes the majority incorrectly interpreted prior case law regarding the certainty required from a sentencing judge's certificate and improperly directed the North Carolina court to pass on the validity of Virginia convictions.
-
530 F.2d 583·
4th Cir.·
1976-01-19
·cited 28×
The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment, as genuine issues of material fact existed regarding prisoners' claims of due process violations and cruel and unusual punishment.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding racial discrimination in her non-renewal, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend the complaint with a new cause of acti
-
The dissenting judge believes the federal court has jurisdiction to enjoin the sale of property despite principles of comity, as the adequacy of state remedies is uncertain.
-
The court held that the petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition to vacate the district court's discovery order should be denied because the petitioners failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion or usurpation of power sufficient to warrant such extraordinary relief.
-
The court held that the trial court did not err in its rulings of law or submission of issues to the jury, affirming the general verdict for the defendants.
-
A party acting in good faith under statutes later declared unconstitutional is not liable for damages under § 1983, absent a showing of improper motive or lack of probable cause.