42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action

943 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,362 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Bancroft Dudley Hall v. Ochs
  817 F.2d 920· 5th Cir.· 1987-05-05 ·cited 53×·via Civil Rights Act Of 1871 (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that the trial court properly directed a verdict for the plaintiff on the false imprisonment claim, denied qualified immunity for the imprisonment, and affirmed most damages awards, but reversed the attorneys' fees multiplier.
• McCALL-BEY v. Franzen
  777 F.2d 1178· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-20 ·cited 53×
  Federal courts do not have inherent jurisdiction to enforce settlement agreements of dismissed cases; an independent basis for federal jurisdiction is required.
• KEY v. Bud Rutherford
  645 F.2d 880· 10th Cir.· 1981-04-10 ·cited 53×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  The court held that intervening Supreme Court decisions require a new trial for the City of Stroud and officials in their official capacities due to changes in municipal immunity law, but affirmed the judgment for individual defendants in their personal capacities based on suffic
• Cinevision Corp. v. City OF Burbank
  745 F.2d 560· 9th Cir.· 1984-10-18 ·cited 52×
  The court held that live musical expression is protected by the First Amendment and that the Starlight Bowl is a public forum, thus the City's content-based rejection of concerts violated Cinevision's rights.
• Beitzell v. Jeffrey
  643 F.2d 870· 1st Cir.· 1981-03-06 ·cited 52×
  A probationary university employee does not have a constitutionally protected property interest in obtaining tenure, nor is a liberty interest created by reputational harm unless it is severe and linked to a tangible change in status or employment.
• Dewell v. Lawson
  489 F.2d 877· 10th Cir.· 1974-01-07 ·cited 52×
  The court, in part, affirmed the dismissal of the action against the City of Oklahoma City and the Chief of Police, finding the complaint did not state a civil rights cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• NEY v. State OF Cal.
  439 F.2d 1285· 9th Cir.· 1971-03-25 ·cited 52×·via Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
• Angelynn York v. Story
  324 F.2d 450· 9th Cir.· 1963-10-28 ·cited 52×·via Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that a complaint alleging police officers took and distributed nude photographs of a citizen over her objection, acting under color of authority, states a claim for deprivation of privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, thus establishing federa
• Prop. Mgmt. & Invs., Inc. v. Lewis
  752 F.2d 599· 11th Cir.· 1985-02-08 ·cited 51×
  The court held that a state court receiver is immune from suit for actions within the scope of their authority and that the district court properly converted a motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment, affirming the dismissal and summary judgment.
• Burns v. Sullivan
  619 F.2d 99· 1st Cir.· 1980-03-31 ·cited 51×·via Civil Rights Act Of 1871 (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that the plaintiff's equal protection claim was barred by the statute of limitations, applying the six-month period from the Massachusetts anti-discrimination statute as the most analogous to federal civil rights actions. The court also affirmed the dismissal of th
• Rode v. Dellarciprete
  845 F.2d 1195· 3d Cir.· 1988-04-28 ·cited 50×
  The court held that a sibling-in-law relationship is not constitutionally protected association under the First Amendment, thus affirming summary judgment on that claim.
• Coleman v. Nyal Frantz
  754 F.2d 719· 7th Cir.· 1985-01-30 ·cited 50×
  The concurring judge agrees that Sheriff Frantz was shielded by qualified immunity, but disagrees with the majority's reasoning regarding the clarity of the duty to release the prisoner.
• Jackson v. Hayakawa
  682 F.2d 1344· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-03 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar actions for injunctive or declaratory relief against state officials sued in their official capacities under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and that dismissal of certain defendants in their official capacities was erroneous.
• Muscare v. Quinn
  614 F.2d 577· 7th Cir.· 1980-02-13 ·cited 50×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  The court held that attorney's fees should only be awarded for the claim upon which the plaintiff prevailed, not for unsuccessful claims, and remanded for recalculation.
• Durso v. Rowe
  579 F.2d 1365· 7th Cir.· 1978-07-19 ·cited 50×
  Revocation of a prisoner's work-release status may implicate a constitutionally protected liberty interest if based on state law or practice conditioning such revocation upon proof of misconduct or specified events, and equal protection claims are not limited to suspect classific
• Stone v. Morris
  546 F.2d 730· 7th Cir.· 1976-12-10 ·cited 50×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  A district court has the discretion to compel an incarcerated party's presence at trial via writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, and a prison memorandum may be admissible under the business records exception if a proper foundation is laid.
• Buhr v. Buffalo Pub. Sch. Dist. NO. 38
  509 F.2d 1196· 8th Cir.· 1974-12-31 ·cited 50×
  A non-tenured public school teacher's termination does not violate due process unless it deprives them of a constitutionally protected liberty or property interest.
• McDONNELL v. Wolff
  483 F.2d 1059· 8th Cir.· 1973-08-02 ·cited 50×
• Jones v. Hopper
  410 F.2d 1323· 10th Cir.· 1969-05-19 ·cited 50×·via Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The dissenting judge holds that the complaint sufficiently alleges a violation of First Amendment rights, and therefore the case should proceed to trial.
• Stiltner v. Rhay
  371 F.2d 420· 9th Cir.· 1967-01-05 ·cited 50×·via Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that the amended complaint failed to state a claim under the Civil Rights Act, as the alleged deprivations did not violate constitutional guarantees.
• Sostre v. McGINNIS
  334 F.2d 906· 2d Cir.· 1964-07-30 ·cited 50×·via Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that while prisoners have religious rights, these are subject to significant limitations necessary for prison discipline, and state authorities should be given the first opportunity to establish rules for these rights.
• Baldwin v. Morgan
  251 F.2d 780· 5th Cir.· 1958-01-14 ·cited 50×·via Civil Rights Act Of 1871 (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The majority erred in finding federal court jurisdiction over the Birmingham Terminal Company.
• Ortega v. Ragen
  216 F.2d 561· 7th Cir.· 1954-11-01 ·cited 50×·via Civil Rights Act Of 1871 (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that a prisoner's complaint alleging a warden refused to deliver a letter, without alleging facts showing a violation of a specific federal right, fails to state a cause of action under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983.
• Guillermina Cortes-Quinones v. Jimenez-Nettleship
  842 F.2d 556· 1st Cir.· 1988-03-28 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the jury's finding of deliberate indifference regarding prisoner's death was supported by sufficient evidence, denying qualified immunity on liability, but vacated the damages and attorney fees awards for further proceedings.
• McCRAE v. W.T. Hankins
  720 F.2d 863· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-05 ·cited 49×
  The court held that while prison regulations created a liberty interest in avoiding extended lockdown, the procedures afforded were constitutionally adequate. However, the court reversed the dismissal of the property claim, finding that an intentional deprivation of property is n
• Turpin v. Mailet
  579 F.2d 152· 2d Cir.· 1978-06-05 ·cited 49×·via Civil Rights Act Of 1871 (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court, in a concurring opinion, argues that the dissent's concerns about unlimited municipal liability for constitutional violations are overstated and fail to consider existing limitations and legal developments.
• LaREAU v. Ellis C. MacDOUGALL
  473 F.2d 974· 2d Cir.· 1972-12-15 ·cited 49×·via Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that the conditions in the strip cell and the penalty imposed violated LaReau's Eighth Amendment rights.
• Christmas v. Lolita Sanders
  759 F.2d 1284· 7th Cir.· 1985-04-12 ·cited 48×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Action For Deprivation Of Rights)
  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.
• Dewey v. The Univ. OF NEW Hampshire
  694 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1982-11-26 ·cited 48×·via Civil Rights Complaint (Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that the plaintiff's allegations in Count I were too conclusory to state a claim for retaliation under the First Amendment, and that the remaining counts were properly dismissed as time-barred.
• Stypmann v. The City & Cnty. OF SAN Francisco
  557 F.2d 1338· 9th Cir.· 1977-07-21 ·cited 48×
  The court held that California Vehicle Code § 22851 and the San Francisco ordinance, which establish a possessory lien for towage and storage fees without adequate prior or post-seizure hearing, violate the Due Process Clause.
• Norcott Corby v. Conboy
  457 F.2d 251· 2d Cir.· 1972-03-15 ·cited 48×
• Dale v. Demarest J. Hahn
  440 F.2d 633· 2d Cir.· 1971-02-19 ·cited 48×·via Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that a claim for deprivation of property rights, without more, does not state a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3) and (4).
• Collum v. Butler
  421 F.2d 1257· 7th Cir.· 1970-01-20 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the plaintiff's appeal from the remittitur order was not reviewable, and the judgment should be affirmed despite an erroneous jury instruction on denial of contact/counsel, as the error was harmless.
• Penley v. Eslinger
  605 F.3d 843· 11th Cir.· 2010-05-03 ·cited 47×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Excessive Force)
  A fifteen-year-old student brought a modified toy pistol to school, triggering a police standoff during which Lieutenant Michael W. Weippert fired a fatal shot to the head. The parents sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Florida law, alleging excessive force and violation of Fourth A
• Miller v. Solem
  728 F.2d 1020· 8th Cir.· 1984-02-23 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the inmate failed to demonstrate a material factual dispute regarding the defendants' deliberate indifference to his constitutional rights, thus summary judgment was appropriate.
• Wellington v. Daniels
  717 F.2d 932· 4th Cir.· 1983-09-19 ·cited 47×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Excessive Force)
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict for the city and chief, nor in denying a new trial, as there was insufficient evidence of a municipal policy to allow the use of a dangerous instrumentality.
• Jacobson v. Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency
  566 F.2d 1353· 9th Cir.· 1977-12-21 ·cited 47×·via Civil Rights Act Of 1871 (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that while a cause of action for inverse condemnation against the TRPA fails due to lack of condemnation authority, a due process claim under the Fifth Amendment is stated. The TRPA is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment unless immunity is waived, and off
• Rosado v. Wyman
  414 F.2d 170· 2d Cir.· 1969-07-16 ·cited 47×·via Civil Rights Act Of 1871 (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court concurred that the district court abused its discretion in rendering judgment on the pendent statutory claim, finding it more appropriate for initial resolution by the relevant federal agency.
• Lynch v. City OF Milwaukee
  747 F.2d 423· 7th Cir.· 1984-10-31 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney's fees, including a negative multiplier, despite the nominal damages awarded.
• Altman v. Hurst
  734 F.2d 1240· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-18 ·cited 46×
  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.
• 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.
• Wilwording v. Swenson
  502 F.2d 844· 8th Cir.· 1974-09-10 ·cited 46×
  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×
  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.
• Grafton v. Brooklyn LAW Sch.
  478 F.2d 1137· 2d Cir.· 1973-05-24 ·cited 46×·via Civil Rights Suit Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that the actions of Brooklyn Law School in dismissing students were not "under color of any State Law," and thus the suit lacked federal jurisdiction.
• Coleman v. Johnston
  247 F.2d 273· 7th Cir.· 1957-08-12 ·cited 46×·via Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint, alleging deprivation of constitutional rights under the Civil Rights Act, stated a sufficient cause of action to prevent dismissal.
• Cotner v. Denny Hopkins
  795 F.2d 900· 10th Cir.· 1986-07-15 ·cited 45×
  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.
• Ustrak v. Fairman
  781 F.2d 573· 7th Cir.· 1986-01-09 ·cited 45×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Violations
  The court held that a prisoner's claim of racial discrimination in disciplinary punishment and job denial failed due to lack of evidence, and while retaliation for complaints was proven, the damages awarded were excessive and unsupported.
• Kelso and Mary Rankin v. City OF Wichita Falls
  762 F.2d 444· 5th Cir.· 1985-06-10 ·cited 45×·via Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  The court held that the complaint failed to allege the abuse of government power necessary to elevate an ordinary tort claim to constitutional status under section 1983.
• Brown v. Bd. OF BAR Exam'rs OF the State OF Nev. & Bd. of Governors of the State Bar of Nev.
  623 F.2d 605· 9th Cir.· 1980-07-18 ·cited 45×·via Civil Rights Act Of 1871 (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  A federal district court lacks jurisdiction to review a state court's decision on an individual application for admission to the bar, even if the claim alleges arbitrary application of rules or constitutional violations.
• Holt v. Pitts
  619 F.2d 558· 6th Cir.· 1980-02-27 ·cited 45×