42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim

3,807 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 3,026 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Coleen R. Roberts v. Coll. OF THE Desert
  870 F.2d 1411· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-22 ·cited 50×
  The court held that Title VII does not preempt § 1983 claims for constitutional violations and that a property interest in employment can arise from mutual understandings. It also found the statute of limitations defense waived and that the district court erred in reinstating the
• White v. Frank
  855 F.2d 956· 2d Cir.· 1988-08-24 ·cited 50×
  Police officers are not absolutely immune from civil liability under § 1983 for malicious prosecution if they acted as complaining witnesses, and this factual determination prevents interlocutory appeal of the immunity defense.
• Koch v. City OF Hutchinson
  847 F.2d 1436· 10th Cir.· 1988-06-02 ·cited 50×
• Anderson v. Gutschenritter
  836 F.2d 346· 7th Cir.· 1988-01-07 ·cited 50×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  The court held that a pretrial detainee's claim for failure to protect falls under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, not the Eighth Amendment, and that the county could be liable under section 1983 for a policymaker's decision.
• Coverdell v. The Dep't OF Soc. & Health Servs.
  834 F.2d 758· 9th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 50×
  Child protective services workers are entitled to absolute quasi-prosecutorial immunity for initiating and pursuing child dependency proceedings, and absolute quasi-judicial immunity for executing court orders in such matters. A claim for injunctive relief is moot if there is no
• Norco Constr., Inc. v. King Cnty.
  801 F.2d 1143· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-03 ·cited 50×
  The court held that Norco's federal and state claims were not barred by the statute of limitations because they did not accrue until the county made a final decision on the plat application, and that the claims were not barred by res judicata because the prior mandamus action cou
• Williams C. Hall and Jean G. Hall v. City OF Santa Barbara
  833 F.2d 1270· 9th Cir.· 1986-08-22 ·cited 50×
  The panel opinion incorrectly held that a city rent control ordinance constituted a physical taking compensable under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
• White v. Pierce Cnty. & Raymond Fjetland
  797 F.2d 812· 9th Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 50×
  The defendants failed to demonstrate as a matter of law that they had probable cause to believe the child was abused or would be harmed if a warrant was obtained.
• Martin v. Sargent
  780 F.2d 1334· 8th Cir.· 1985-12-20 ·cited 50×
  The court held that a prisoner's claims for injunctive and declaratory relief regarding prison conditions are moot if the prisoner is no longer subject to those conditions, but claims for monetary damages may proceed. Claims based on respondeat superior or general allegations wit
• 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.
• DAY v. Wayne Cnty. Bd. OF Auditors
  749 F.2d 1199· 6th Cir.· 1984-12-06 ·cited 50×
  Title VII provides the exclusive remedy for employment discrimination claims based solely on violations of Title VII, precluding a separate § 1983 claim for such violations.
• Phillips v. Telfair J. Mashburn
  746 F.2d 782· 11th Cir.· 1984-11-15 ·cited 50×
  A district court may properly dismiss an in forma pauperis pro se complaint alleging a conspiracy between a state judge and private defendants if the complaint lacks specific supporting factual averments.
• Tubbesing v. Arnold
  742 F.2d 401· 8th Cir.· 1984-08-22 ·cited 50×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim For Deprivation Of Liberty Without Due Process
  The court held that the Board members are entitled to qualified immunity on the claims for money damages because the plaintiff did not have a clearly established property interest in her employment and did not establish a deprivation of liberty.
• Leroy W. Demery, M.D. v. Kupperman
  735 F.2d 1139· 9th Cir.· 1984-06-22 ·cited 50×
  The court's holding is that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar suits against state officials in their individual capacities for federal constitutional claims.
• Jackson v. Hayakawa
  682 F.2d 1344· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-03 ·cited 50×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  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.
• Harris v. Pirch
  677 F.2d 681· 8th Cir.· 1982-05-14 ·cited 50×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict against Sheriff Pirch and Deputy Kipping, and that Kipping was entitled to qualified immunity.
• Hastings v. Maine-Endwell Cent. Sch. Dist.
  676 F.2d 893· 2d Cir.· 1982-04-06 ·cited 50×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal from the interim attorney's fees order, as it was neither a final order, an injunction, nor a certified interlocutory order.
• Bartholomew v. Watson
  665 F.2d 910· 9th Cir.· 1982-01-11 ·cited 50×
  The court held that attorneys' fees can be awarded for services performed in state court proceedings that are an essential part of a federal civil rights claim, and that fees should be based on work performed on prevailing issues.
• Jones v. Tex. Tech Univ.
  656 F.2d 1137· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-25 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the prior consent judgment barred the current lawsuit under res judicata, but reversed the award of attorneys' fees, finding the lawsuit was not frivolous.
• 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.
• Sweeney v. Bd. OF Trs. OF Keene State Coll.
  569 F.2d 169· 1st Cir.· 1978-01-04 ·cited 50×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that circumstantial evidence and statistics can establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment under Title VII, and that the defendants failed to rebut the plaintiff's evidence of sex discrimination in her second promotion attempt.
• 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.
• McLELLAN v. Miss. Power & Light Co.
  526 F.2d 870· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-05 ·cited 50×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that a petition for rehearing en banc should be granted.
• Nolan v. Palmer C. Scafati
  430 F.2d 548· 1st Cir.· 1970-08-14 ·cited 50×
  The court held that a prisoner's allegations of denial of due process and denial of access to the courts by prison officials state claims upon which relief may be granted, requiring further factual determination.
• Crews v. Cloncs
  432 F.2d 1259· 7th Cir.· 1970-08-10 ·cited 50×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that the school district failed to provide a substantial justification for excluding a student based on his long hair, violating his constitutional rights.
• Albert Edwin Church, II v. Hegstrom
  416 F.2d 449· 2d Cir.· 1969-10-09 ·cited 50×
  A complaint alleging only negligence in providing medical care to a state prisoner is insufficient to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Stiltner v. Rhay
  371 F.2d 420· 9th Cir.· 1967-01-05 ·cited 50×
  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.
• Morton Birnbaum v. Trussell
  347 F.2d 86· 2d Cir.· 1965-06-17 ·cited 50×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
• Sostre v. McGINNIS
  334 F.2d 906· 2d Cir.· 1964-07-30 ·cited 50×·via Violation Of 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.
• Ortega v. Ragen
  216 F.2d 561· 7th Cir.· 1954-11-01 ·cited 50×·via Violation Of 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.
• Andrews v. City OF Philadelphia & Wilson W. Goode
  895 F.2d 1469· 3d Cir.· 1990-02-08 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the jury's findings on § 1983 claims were not sufficient to establish a Title VII hostile work environment claim, and that certain judgments n.o.v. were appropriate while others were not.
• Melear v. Spears
  862 F.2d 1177· 5th Cir.· 1989-01-12 ·cited 49×
  Qualified immunity shields officials if their actions were reasonably thought consistent with established rights, assessed by objective reasonableness against clearly established law.
• Schaper v. City OF Huntsville
  813 F.2d 709· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-06 ·cited 49×·via Section 1983
  The court held that allegations of bias and conspiracy in pre-termination hearings, even if true, do not state a procedural or substantive due process claim when a post-termination administrative remedy is available.
• Rutherford v. City OF Berkeley
  780 F.2d 1444· 9th Cir.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the plaintiff stated a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for substantive due process violations, and that the district court erred in granting a directed verdict due to insufficient evidence.
• Stallworth v. Laquita Shuler
  777 F.2d 1431· 11th Cir.· 1985-12-11 ·cited 49×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that the district court's findings of intentional racial discrimination, back pay, compensatory damages, and punitive damages were not clearly erroneous and were supported by the evidence.
• Trujillo v. The Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF the Cnty. OF Santa FE
  768 F.2d 1186· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-26 ·cited 49×
  The court held that while parents have a constitutionally protected interest in their familial association with their child, a section 1983 claim for deprivation of this right requires an allegation that the state intended to interfere with that specific relationship.
• Bireline v. Seagondollar
  567 F.2d 260· 4th Cir.· 1977-12-12 ·cited 49×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  The court held that the district court did not err in allowing the defendants to amend their answer to assert the statute of limitations and in granting summary judgment based on that statute.
• Girard v. 94TH St. & Fifth Ave. Corp.
  530 F.2d 66· 2d Cir.· 1976-01-13 ·cited 49×
  The court held that allegations of individual defendants acting in personal capacities for personal benefit, even within a corporate structure, can support a conspiracy claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) and justify pendent jurisdiction over a state law claim.
• Roseboro v. Garrison
  528 F.2d 309· 4th Cir.· 1975-10-15 ·cited 49×
  The court held that a pro se plaintiff must be given fair notice of the requirements of the summary judgment rule before summary judgment can be entered against them.
• Hawkins v. Town OF Shaw
  437 F.2d 1286· 5th Cir.· 1971-01-23 ·cited 49×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that the district court's factual conclusion that service disparities were not race-based was clearly erroneous, and it was error not to apply the strict scrutiny standard for racial classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
• Brown v. Dixie Herlong Chastain
  416 F.2d 1012· 5th Cir.· 1969-08-04 ·cited 49×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The district court erred in dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction. Federal courts have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1343 to hear claims alleging deprivation of constitutional rights by state judicial officers. The Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not preclude this jurisdicti
• Clark Davenport Snell v. Conley Tunnell
  920 F.2d 673· 10th Cir.· 1990-11-30 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the non-attorney DHS employees were acting in an investigative capacity and thus not entitled to absolute immunity, and that the DHS attorney was not entitled to absolute immunity for seeking an order based on false information. The court also affirmed the den
• WU v. Thomas
  863 F.2d 1543· 11th Cir.· 1989-01-23 ·cited 48×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment, as the plaintiffs had not failed to exhaust administrative remedies, their claims were not barred by res judicata, their retaliation claims were valid under Title VII, and sovereign immunity did not bar al
• Marx v. Gumbinner
  855 F.2d 783· 11th Cir.· 1988-09-20 ·cited 48×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear an interlocutory appeal from an order denying qualified immunity when the plaintiff also sought injunctive relief.
• Conner v. Reinhard
  847 F.2d 384· 7th Cir.· 1988-05-19 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the qualified immunity inquiry cannot be confined to a purely objective view when the legality of actions depends on the defendant's motive.
• Hogue v. Clinton
  791 F.2d 1318· 8th Cir.· 1986-05-27 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the plaintiff did not possess a property interest in continued employment under Arkansas law, but remanded for a determination of whether a liberty interest was violated due to public dissemination of stigmatizing reasons for termination.
• Malak v. Associated Physicians, Inc.
  784 F.2d 277· 7th Cir.· 1986-02-24 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the defendants' conduct constituted state action. The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
• Wycoff v. Menke
  773 F.2d 983· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-25 ·cited 48×
  The Supreme Court's decision in Wilson v. Garcia, which mandates that all section 1983 claims be governed by a state's personal injury statute of limitations, applies retroactively. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is barred by Iowa's two-year statute of limitations.
• J & J Anderson, Inc. v. The Town OF Erie
  767 F.2d 1469· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-18 ·cited 48×
  The court held that while the district court erred in finding special circumstances to deny attorney fees, the plaintiffs could not substantially prevail on their § 1983 claim, thus affirming the denial of fees.
• Manecke v. Sch. Bd. OF Pinellas Cnty.
  762 F.2d 912· 11th Cir.· 1985-06-11 ·cited 48×·via Section 1983
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the § 1983 due process claim, but correctly dismissed the § 504 claim for failure to allege discrimination.