42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Action For Deprivation Of Rights)

35 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Patsy v. Fla. Int'l Univ.
  634 F.2d 900· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-22 ·cited 104×
  The court held that exhaustion of adequate state administrative remedies can be a prerequisite to filing a section 1983 suit, departing from a strict no-exhaustion rule.
• Christmas v. Lolita Sanders
  759 F.2d 1284· 7th Cir.· 1985-04-12 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse her discretion in excluding police reports offered as prior consistent statements and in excluding evidence of the plaintiff's prior rape conviction.
• French v. Owens
  777 F.2d 1250· 7th Cir.· 1985-11-26 ·cited 44×
  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
• In re Estelle
  516 F.2d 480· 5th Cir.· 1975-07-24 ·cited 43×
  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.
• Clark v. The City OF LOS Angeles
  650 F.2d 1033· 9th Cir.· 1981-07-13 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the admission of a diary as evidence was reversible error because it was not a business record or recorded recollection and was highly prejudicial. The court also affirmed the denial of the motion to declare the zoning ordinance unconstitutional.
• Deane Hill Country Club, Inc. v. City OF Knoxville & George F. McCanless
  379 F.2d 321· 6th Cir.· 1967-06-16 ·cited 30×
  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.
• Manhart v. City OF LOS Angeles
  553 F.2d 581· 9th Cir.· 1976-11-23 ·cited 29×
  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.
• Alva Gutierrez v. Mun. Court OF the Se. Jud. Dist.
  838 F.2d 1031· 9th Cir.· 1988-01-27 ·cited 28×
  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
• Driscoll v. Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs
  484 F.2d 682· 7th Cir.· 1973-09-11 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a union member's challenge to a non-Communist affidavit requirement for candidacy, even if framed as a free speech issue, falls under Title IV of the LMRDA and must be pursued through the Secretary of Labor, not a private suit under Title I. Furthermore, the u
• Soto v. Dickey
  744 F.2d 1260· 7th Cir.· 1984-09-20 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court erred in finding that the use of mace in the Adjustment Center violated constitutional rights, as the evidence showed it was used reasonably to maintain discipline and safety after inmates refused lawful orders.
• Trooper Alvin T. Pontarelli v. Stone
  930 F.2d 104· 1st Cir.· 1991-04-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a notice of appeal using "et al." is insufficient to confer appellate jurisdiction for unnamed parties and that mistaken reliance on "et al." does not constitute excusable neglect for extending the appeal deadline. The court also affirmed that sex discriminati
• Phelps v. The Wichita Eagle-Beacon
  886 F.2d 1262· 10th Cir.· 1989-09-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that plaintiff's Section 1981 and RICO claims were properly dismissed, but his Section 1985(3) claim and potentially his Section 1983 Equal Protection claim were not, and the state action issue for the Section 1983 claim requires further factual development.
• United States ex rel. Harold Walker v. Mancusi
  467 F.2d 51· 2d Cir.· 1972-09-20 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the segregation of inmates in a special housing unit did not violate their Eighth or Fourteenth Amendment rights, and the procedures used satisfied due process requirements.
• Reynaldo Tongol v. Usery
  601 F.2d 1091· 9th Cir.· 1979-08-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the federal regulation prohibiting states from waiving recoupment of overpayments was invalid as exceeding the Secretary's statutory authority and conflicting with congressional intent to apply state law. The court also held that plaintiffs stated a claim unde
• Salahuddin v. Harris
  782 F.2d 1127· 2d Cir.· 1986-01-31 ·cited 21×
  The court held that dismissal under Rule 37(d) was improper because the plaintiff appeared for his deposition, and dismissal under Rule 37(b)(2) was improper because no court order was violated. Furthermore, neither Rule 16(f) nor Rule 41(b) justified the dismissal.
• Ardith McPherson v. Rankin
  736 F.2d 175· 5th Cir.· 1984-07-12 ·cited 18×
  Summary judgment was inappropriate because substantial issues of material fact exist regarding the context and intent of the plaintiff's statement, which are crucial for determining First Amendment protection.
• Leonard v. Miss. State Prob. & Parole Bd.
  509 F.2d 820· 5th Cir.· 1975-03-17 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the decision in Gates v. Collier should not be applied retroactively to require expungement of pre-Gates prison disciplinary records, and that the class action was properly brought under § 1983.
• Sunflower Cnty. Colored Baptist Ass'n v. Trs. of Indianola Mun. Separate Sch. Dist.
  369 F.2d 795· 5th Cir.· 1966-12-01 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the allegations in the removal petition were insufficient to meet the conditions for removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1443, as the eminent domain proceedings did not present a situation where federal rights would inevitably be denied.
• Engblom v. Carey
  677 F.2d 957· 2d Cir.· 1982-05-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Third Amendment's protection against quartering troops extends to individuals with a lawful occupation or possession interest in a house, not just fee simple owners. It also held that while the state's emergency justified summary eviction without pre-depri
• Olshock v. Vill. OF Skokie
  541 F.2d 1254· 7th Cir.· 1976-09-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the record did not sustain a finding of clear and intentional discrimination by the Board, and thus the plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of proof for constitutional violations.
• Wilson v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  54 F.4th 652· 11th Cir.· 2022-11-29 ·cited 10×
  A Florida prison inmate and veteran challenged prison officials' seizure of his Veterans Administration disability benefits to satisfy prison liens and medical charges in violation of 38 U.S.C. § 5301, which protects VA benefits from attachment and seizure. The Eleventh Circuit a
• United States v. State OF Wash.
  813 F.2d 1020· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Indian tribes' treaty interpretation claims do not give rise to a claim cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and therefore do not support an award of attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• The Reverend Temperance E. Wright v. State
  495 F.2d 1086· 5th Cir.· 1974-06-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claims for damages under the Fourth Amendment and 18 U.S.C. § 2520, and that the claims should not have been dismissed without an opportunity to prove them. The court also noted that equitable relief cla
• Otto v. Hon. Frank R. Somers
  332 F.2d 697· 6th Cir.· 1964-06-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the taxpayer's complaint for lack of federal jurisdiction, as no civil rights violations under the Fourteenth Amendment were demonstrated.
• Showers v. City of Bartow
  978 F. Supp. 1464· M.D. Fla.· 1997-09-24 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state sufficient factual allegations to support claims under Title VII, § 1981, and § 1983, and also failed to exhaust administrative remedies for the Title VII claim, but denied dismissal for lack of jurisdiction over the state law cla
• Houston Welf. Rights Org., Inc. v. Vowell
  555 F.2d 1219· 5th Cir.· 1977-07-13 ·cited 9×
  The court held that Texas' policy of prorating shelter and utility expenses when a non-AFDC recipient shares a residence violates federal regulations, and this violation tainted the averaging process for its flat-grant system, requiring recalculation of the standard of need.
• Smith v. N. La. Med. Review Ass'n
  735 F.2d 168· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that plaintiffs failed to establish a constitutionally protected property interest in the Waiver of Liability (WOL) presumption and that the NLMRA, as a federal entity, could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for state action.
• Newcomb v. Ingle
  944 F.2d 1534· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-28 ·cited 4×
  Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act does not apply to a custodial parent intercepting a minor child's telephone conversations within the family home, and a prosecutor is entitled to absolute immunity for prosecutorial decisions.
• Mitson v. Coler
  670 F. Supp. 1568· S.D. Fla.· 1987-10-05 ·cited 3×
  The court held that Veterans Administration Improved Pensions (VAIP) awarded pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 503(a)(8) as reimbursement for medical expenses should not be counted as income for determining eligibility for Florida's Medicaid Institutional Care Payments (ICP) Program.
• Carver v. Casey
  669 F. Supp. 412· S.D. Fla.· 1987-08-21 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiff's Title VII claims were time-barred due to failure to provide timely notice to the proper defendant, and other claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, preemption, or exclusivity of Title VII.
• Miller v. Kusper
  445 F.2d 1059· 7th Cir.· 1971-07-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because the city officials' refusal to provide computerized voter data did not constitute a misuse of power or an abridgment of constitutional rights.
• Perez v. Anderson
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-07-03
  The court held that the admission of the plaintiff's prior conviction and drug use evidence was proper, and denied the plaintiff's motion for a new trial. The court also denied the plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to file an appeal.
• Brant v. Palmer
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-25
  The court held that a blanket protective order is not warranted based solely on the number of requests for admission, and a motion to compel must be filed in the district where compliance is required.
• Brant v. Palmer
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-01-02
  Consolidating four related federal cases, the court ruled on discovery disputes in death row inmates' Eighth Amendment challenges to Florida's three-drug lethal injection protocol using etomidate, rocuronium bromide, and potassium acetate. The court granted the inmates' motions t
• DiMaio v. Williams
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-11-01
  The court held that a pretrial detainee's constitutional right of access to courts is satisfied if he is offered legal counsel and voluntarily proceeds pro se, even if he claims a lack of legal supplies.