42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action

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

• N.A.A.C.P. v. City OF Richmond
  743 F.2d 1346· 9th Cir.· 1984-09-28 ·cited 46×
  The Ninth Circuit held that the City of Richmond's 20-day advance notice requirement for parade permits violates the First Amendment and that the waiver provision granting unfettered discretion is unconstitutional.
• Altman v. Hurst
  734 F.2d 1240· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-18 ·cited 46×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  A public employee's reassignment and denial of overtime or vacation time, absent a showing of constructive discharge or speech on matters of public concern, does not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• LaRon McKINLEY v. Lt. Gary Trattles
  732 F.2d 1320· 7th Cir.· 1984-04-23 ·cited 46×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  The court held that the jury's award of punitive damages for an unconstitutional strip search should be reinstated, subject to a remittitur, and affirmed the denial of the defendant's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on liability.
• Emmitt G. King v. Blankenship
  636 F.2d 70· 4th Cir.· 1980-12-05 ·cited 46×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Excessive Force)
  The court held that the district court's finding that the force used by Officer Johnson was not actionable excessive force was clearly erroneous.
• Lou J. D'Iorio v. Cnty. OF Del. & Faith Ryan Whittlesey
  592 F.2d 681· 3d Cir.· 1978-12-20 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the district court should have abstained from deciding the constitutional claims until the relevant state law issues, particularly the interpretation of the Delaware County Home Rule Charter, were resolved by the Pennsylvania state courts.
• Kermit Constr. Corp. v. Banco Credito Y Ahorro Ponceno
  547 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1976-12-29 ·cited 46×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  A receiver acting under court orders shares the appointing judge's absolute immunity from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but a bank and corporation accused of conspiring with the receiver do not. Claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 and § 1981 were properly dismissed.
• The SEA Ranch Ass'n v. California Coastal Zone Conservation Commissions
  537 F.2d 1058· 9th Cir.· 1976-06-10 ·cited 46×
  The court held that abstention was proper for claims of project-wide exemption under the California Coastal Zone Act, but individual parcel exemption claims lacked a case or controversy and should have been dismissed.
• Wilwording v. Swenson
  502 F.2d 844· 8th Cir.· 1974-09-10 ·cited 46×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that the petitioner's claim of punishment without any evidence is cognizable in habeas corpus and not barred by res judicata, collateral estoppel, controlling weight, or waiver, and is not foreclosed by the nonretroactivity of Wolff v. McDonnell.
• Nelson v. Heyne
  491 F.2d 352· 7th Cir.· 1974-01-31 ·cited 46×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that the use of disciplinary beatings and tranquilizing drugs in the circumstances presented violated juveniles' Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, and that juveniles have a constitutional right to rehabilitative treatment.
• Stanley v. City OF Dalton
  219 F.3d 1280· 11th Cir.· 2000-07-26 ·cited 45×
  The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court's denial of qualified immunity to Police Chief James D. Chadwick, finding that he was entitled to immunity from Police Lieutenant Jerry M. Stanley's First Amendment retaliation claim. The court concluded that while Stanley's speech
• Cotner v. Denny Hopkins
  795 F.2d 900· 10th Cir.· 1986-07-15 ·cited 45×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that while restrictions on future filings for abusive litigants are permissible, a fine imposed as punishment requires specific procedural protections, and sanctions cannot completely bar access to the courts.
• Rennie v. Klein
  720 F.2d 266· 3d Cir.· 1983-10-13 ·cited 45×
  Involuntarily committed mental patients have a qualified constitutional right to refuse antipsychotic medication. This right is protected by the Due Process Clause, which requires that any decision to administer such drugs against a patient's will must be based on the "profession
• United Carolina Bank CTA of the Est. of Seymour I. Somberg v. Bd. OF Regents OF Stephen F. Austin State Univ.
  665 F.2d 553· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-11 ·cited 45×
  The Eleventh Amendment bars suits for monetary relief against state university officials in their official capacities, and Stephen F. Austin State University is an arm of the state. Individual defendants may be liable for constitutional violations if they knew or should have know
• Holt v. Pitts
  619 F.2d 558· 6th Cir.· 1980-02-27 ·cited 45×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
• Boraas v. The Vill. OF Belle Terre
  476 F.2d 806· 2d Cir.· 1973-02-27 ·cited 45×
  The dissenting judge argues that the Village's zoning ordinance is a rational means to achieve legitimate zoning objectives and should be upheld.
• Donahue v. Staunton
  471 F.2d 475· 7th Cir.· 1972-07-06 ·cited 45×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that the plaintiff's speech, which was found to be disruptive and detrimental to the hospital's operations and patient care, provided justifiable reasons for termination, and thus no constitutional right was violated.
• Santiago-Negron v. Modesto Castro-Davila
  865 F.2d 431· 1st Cir.· 1989-01-11 ·cited 44×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that a new trial on damages is required due to erroneous jury instructions on due process, but the jury's finding of political discrimination stands. Reinstatement is permissible despite illegal hiring practices.
• Culebras Enters. Corp. v. Rios
  813 F.2d 506· 1st Cir.· 1987-03-11 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claim for damages for a regulatory taking is premature because they have not exhausted available remedies in Puerto Rico courts, and that claims against officials in their official capacities are barred by the Eleventh Amendment.
• Pacheco v. Gonzalez
  809 F.2d 125· 1st Cir.· 1987-01-13 ·cited 44×
  The court held that defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity on the First Amendment claim because it was clearly established that transitory employees are protected from politically motivated non-renewal, but they were entitled to qualified immunity on the due process c
• Kunzelman v. Gervase Thompson
  799 F.2d 1172· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-25 ·cited 44×
  The court held that collateral estoppel did not apply because the defendants were not parties or privies to the prior state action, and that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that inmates lacked adequate access to the courts through the public defender system.
• Kibbe v. City OF Springfield
  777 F.2d 801· 1st Cir.· 1985-11-27 ·cited 44×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  The court held that a jury could reasonably find a municipality liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for gross negligence in training its police officers, even if the harm resulted from a single evening's events, provided there is evidence beyond the incident itself linking the training
• French v. Owens
  777 F.2d 1250· 7th Cir.· 1985-11-26 ·cited 44×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Action For Deprivation Of Rights)
  The court held that while overcrowding, double-celling, inhumane restraints, inadequate medical care, and poor kitchen facilities violated the Eighth Amendment, the district court erred in mandating specific compliance with fire/safety codes and in ordering equal access to rehabi
• Farrar v. Cain
  756 F.2d 1148· 5th Cir.· 1985-04-08 ·cited 44×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  The court held that failure to object to jury instructions or interrogatories generally precludes appellate review, except for fundamental error, and affirmed the denial of damages except for nominal damages against one defendant.
• Rookard v. Health & Hosps. Corp.
  710 F.2d 41· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-09 ·cited 44×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  The court reversed the district court's dismissal, finding a glimmer of a prima facie case for reversal based on the chaotic conditions at Harlem Hospital and potential constitutional deprivations.
• Miofsky v. Superior Court OF the State OF Cal.
  703 F.2d 332· 9th Cir.· 1983-01-03 ·cited 44×
  A federal district court has subject matter jurisdiction over a civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, even when the alleged infringement of rights arises from state court proceedings, and res judicata does not bar claims summarily denied by state appellate courts.
• Berry v. McLEMORE
  670 F.2d 30· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 44×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  A municipality cannot be held liable under § 1983 absent evidence that the constitutional deprivation was pursuant to an official policy or custom, and a plaintiff cannot recover attorney fees from a party dismissed from the suit. However, the district court abused its discretion
• PUE v. Sillas
  632 F.2d 74· 9th Cir.· 1980-06-25 ·cited 44×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that the district judge abused his discretion by ordering abstention because the state statutes at issue were clear and the presence of a 'mirror-image' state constitutional claim does not justify abstention.
• Robbins v. The Dist. Court OF Worth Cnty.
  592 F.2d 1015· 8th Cir.· 1979-02-21 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the appellants' civil rights action was barred by the doctrine of res judicata because the issues and causes of action were the same as those litigated in prior state court proceedings.
• Burt v. The Bd. OF Trs. OF Edgefield Cnty. Sch. Dist.
  521 F.2d 1201· 4th Cir.· 1975-08-06 ·cited 44×
  The court reversed the judgment because the defendants were denied their constitutional right to a jury trial.
• DRY Creek Lodge, Inc. v. The United States
  515 F.2d 926· 10th Cir.· 1975-05-09 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction and on the merits without proper notice and a full hearing, as the plaintiffs' allegations sufficiently invoked federal jurisdiction.
• Spence v. Patience Latting
  512 F.2d 93· 10th Cir.· 1975-02-26 ·cited 44×·via § 1983
  The court held that the plaintiff's federal claims were barred by res judicata because he had the opportunity to litigate them in prior state court actions.
• Cockrum v. Whitney
  479 F.2d 84· 9th Cir.· 1973-05-09 ·cited 44×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that the trial judge erred in setting aside the jury verdict against the marshal because the judge improperly reweighed the evidence instead of viewing it in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. The judgment in favor of the sheriff's deputy was affirmed.
• Burns v. Swenson
  430 F.2d 771· 8th Cir.· 1970-08-31 ·cited 44×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that while an inmate's access to the ACLU could be reasonably regulated for prison security, the order declaring his prior confinement in maximum security "legally improper" was unwarranted and reversed that portion of the lower court's decision.
• Meyers v. Contra Costa Cnty. Dep't OF Soc. Servs.
  812 F.2d 1154· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-16 ·cited 43×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
• Weber v. Dell
  804 F.2d 796· 2d Cir.· 1986-11-06 ·cited 43×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  A jail policy authorizing strip/body cavity searches of all arrestees without reasonable suspicion violates the Fourth Amendment, and the county and sheriff can be held liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for such a policy.
• Bowman v. Pulaski Cnty. Special Sch. Dist.
  723 F.2d 640· 8th Cir.· 1983-12-29 ·cited 43×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that the involuntary transfers of the appellants constituted an abuse of discretion and violated their First Amendment rights, but affirmed the award of attorney fees.
• Concordia v. Bendekovic
  693 F.2d 1073· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-16 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the action based on res judicata without sufficient record evidence, vacating the judgment and remanding for further proceedings.
• Walton v. Eaton Corp.
  563 F.2d 66· 3d Cir.· 1977-07-18 ·cited 43×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Violations
  The court held that a plaintiff who waives the right to a jury trial in an initial complaint cannot revive that right by filing a second, substantially identical complaint, even if it demands a jury trial and alleges new damages.
• In re Estelle
  516 F.2d 480· 5th Cir.· 1975-07-24 ·cited 43×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Action For Deprivation Of Rights)
  Mandamus is inappropriate because the trial court's decision on the United States' right to intervene, even if erroneous, was not a usurpation of power and the petitioner suffers no irreparable harm.
• Easter House v. Felder
  910 F.2d 1387· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-14 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the plaintiff's procedural due process rights were not violated because the state provided adequate post-deprivation remedies for the alleged errors in implementing its civil commitment scheme, and the specific errors were not foreseeable.
• Kurowski v. Krajewski
  848 F.2d 767· 7th Cir.· 1988-06-02 ·cited 42×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  A judge may not fire assistant public defenders based on their political affiliations, as this constitutes an administrative act subject to qualified immunity, not judicial immunity.
• Mazie Keller v. Prince George's Cnty.
  827 F.2d 952· 4th Cir.· 1987-08-26 ·cited 42×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  Congress intended Title VII to be an additional, not exclusive, remedy for employment discrimination claims violating the Fourteenth Amendment, preserving the right to bring a § 1983 action.
• Eldridge Lovelace v. Dall
  820 F.2d 223· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-18 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the plaintiff validly consented to a magistrate trial, the denial of appointed counsel was not an abuse of discretion, and the plaintiff waived his right to a jury trial by failing to object to a bench trial.
• Corn v. City OF Lauderdale Lakes
  816 F.2d 1514· 11th Cir.· 1987-05-14 ·cited 42×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim For Damages
  The court held that the plaintiff's Section 1983 action for damages was ripe because Florida law does not provide an adequate state remedy for injuries caused by confiscatory zoning ordinances.
• DeSHANEY v. Winnebago Cnty. Dep't OF Soc. Servs.
  812 F.2d 298· 7th Cir.· 1987-02-12 ·cited 42×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  The state's failure to protect a child from private violence, even if negligent or reckless, does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause unless the state created the danger or assumed a custodial relationship that increased the risk of harm.
• Smith v. The City OF Fontana
  818 F.2d 1411· 9th Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the plaintiffs' section 1983 claims. The Parratt doctrine, which limits section 1983 actions based on random and unauthorized deprivations when adequate post-deprivation remedies exist, applies only to procedural due proc
• Goldie's Bookstore, Inc. v. The Superior Court OF the State OF Cal.
  739 F.2d 466· 9th Cir.· 1984-08-03 ·cited 42×
  The court should have abstained from hearing the case due to important state interests implicated in the unlawful detainer proceedings.
• B.C.R. Transp. Co., Inc. v. Fontaine
  727 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1984-02-08 ·cited 42×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that a jury could reasonably find that a police officer lacked probable cause and acted in bad faith when obtaining warrants based on an alleged victim's uncorroborated story, and that collateral estoppel did not bar a civil rights action when the issue of probable
• Union Cnty. Jail Inmates v. DI Buono
  713 F.2d 984· 3d Cir.· 1983-08-11 ·cited 42×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that while overcrowding conditions at the jail may be constitutionally problematic, the Commissioner's actions in assigning state prisoners to the jail were not unconstitutional, and the district court erred in voiding the Executive Orders and enjoining the Commiss
• Clulow v. State OF Okla.
  700 F.2d 1291· 10th Cir.· 1983-02-22 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the plaintiff's claims, affirming the dismissal of Counts One through Four as time-barred and Count Five for lack of jurisdiction and immunity, and Count Six for failure to state a claim.