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

• Johnson v. Crippen
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-23
  The court held that claims against Judge Campbell are dismissed with prejudice due to absolute judicial immunity, and claims against Crippen and Smith are dismissed without prejudice for lack of standing, with leave to amend.
• Shaffer v. Scarborough
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-23 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Excessive Force)
  The court held that the deputy did not have arguable probable cause to arrest the plaintiff for obstruction of justice, denying qualified immunity on the false arrest claim.
• Holt v. Hillsborough Cnty.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-21 ·via § 1983
  The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under § 1983 and that her state law claims for negligence and defamation were barred by sovereign immunity and failure to comply with statutory notice requirements.
• Bless v. Dixon
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-21
  The court held that the plaintiff inmate failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, requiring dismissal of his claims.
• Charles v. Orange Cnty. Jail
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-17
  A county jail is not a legal entity amenable to suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and therefore, a complaint filed against it must be dismissed for failure to state a claim.
• Henderson v. FNU Gahrmann
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-16 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Excessive Force)
  Official-capacity claims against state employees for damages are barred by the Eleventh Amendment, as they are equivalent to claims against the state itself, and the State of Florida has not waived its sovereign immunity.
• Butler v. Marion Cnty. Sheriff's Off.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-15 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims against the judge and prosecutors are barred by immunity, the claim against the Sheriff's Office is improper, and the claims against the deputies are not clearly alleged, but granted plaintiff an opportunity to amend.
• Sanon v. Saint Lucie Cnty. Jail
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-01-14 ·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that claims for inmate account withdrawals between 2015-2018 are dismissed with prejudice as time-barred, and a claim for a 2024 withdrawal fails to state a procedural due process violation and is dismissed without prejudice.
• Niemiec v. Hayes
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-01-14
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint, based on fantastic and delusional allegations, is factually frivolous and should be dismissed with prejudice.
• Cook v. State
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-14
  The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny the motion for default judgment and dismiss the amended complaint.
• Bienaime v. Dep't of Child. & Families
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-01-14
  The court granted the motions to dismiss because the Second Amended Complaint was a "shotgun pleading" that failed to comply with Rule 8(a)(2).
• Hilton v. Lulking
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-13
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs under the Eighth Amendment and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims.
• Nicolas v. O'Donnell
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-01-13
  The court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed because his claims, if successful, would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction, and he sued defendants who are immune or not state actors.
• Smith Jr. v. Poveda
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-01-13
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief under § 1983.
• Casey v. Florida Dept of Corrections
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-01-06 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  A prisoner with three prior dismissals ('three strikes') cannot proceed in forma pauperis unless they allege imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time of filing.
• Short v. Freeman
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-01-06 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice.
• Smith Jr. v. Rosado
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-01-06
  The court held that a complaint that is a duplicate of a previously filed amended complaint is considered malicious and subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
• Baker v. Shelly
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-03
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for an Eighth Amendment violation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the defendants.
• Jean-Baptiste v. United States Dep't of Just.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-01-03 ·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court recommends denying the plaintiff's motion to file a petition because his claims are frivolous and lack arguable merit.
• Awolowo v. Carlisle
  N.D. Fla.· 2024-12-23
  The court held that the plaintiff's second amended complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and should be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
• Rivera v. Manatee Cnty. Cent. Jail
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-12-23
  A pro se complaint alleging medical malpractice against a private hospital fails to state a civil rights claim because it does not allege state action, and negligence alone is insufficient for a Section 1983 claim.
• Calisi v. Volusia Cnty. Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-12-20 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Excessive Force)
  The court held that the amended complaint fails to state claims against most defendants due to insufficient identification or lack of factual allegations, but allows the excessive force claim against Lieutenant DeEsposito to proceed.
• Fleuranville v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-12-13
  The court recommended granting defendants' motion for attorney's fees because the plaintiff's claims were frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation.
• Haynes v. Burnham
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-12-06
  The court held that the plaintiff's excessive force and Eighth Amendment claims are not barred by Heck v. Humphrey, and he has alleged sufficient physical injury to pursue compensatory damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e), and punitive damages are available. However, the ADA claim
• Mincieli v. Carlin
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-12-05
  The court held that a pro se plaintiff's complaint was insufficient and dismissed it with leave to amend because it failed to state a plausible claim for relief.
• Cannon v. Chase
  N.D. Fla.· 2024-12-04
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim against the police department and officers, warranting dismissal.
• White v. Eslinger
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-27 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  In a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 prisoner civil rights action, the district court granted a pro se plaintiff's motion to waive Local Rule 3.04's fourteen-day notice requirement for depositions, finding good cause based on mail delays and an approaching discovery deadline.
• White v. Eslinger
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-27 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  The district court affirmed the magistrate judge's order denying the plaintiff's motions to compel, finding no part of the order was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
• Guerrero Lozano v. Rambosk
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-26 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  The court granted the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend his complaint and dismissed the claims against the original defendants, allowing the case to proceed against a newly identified defendant.
• Macker v. Macker
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-25
  A pro se litigant sued the Perdue, Brandon, Fielder, Collins & Mott law firm and five Volusia Sheriff's Office officers, alleging an extensive conspiracy to defraud him and others through fraudulent collection practices and unconstitutional conduct over a twenty-year period. The
• Reed v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-21
  The court held that a prisoner does not have a substantive due process right to postconviction DNA evidence and failed to allege inadequacy of state procedures for a procedural due process claim.
• Corbitt v. Mercado
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-20 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  The court held that the plaintiff's pro se complaint must be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
• Graham v. Bruce
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-20 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and further amendment would be futile.
• Flanders v. Larsen
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-19
  Pro se prisoner Willie James Flanders filed a § 1983 civil rights action against two Florida Department of Corrections officials for allegedly inadequate medical treatment of a preexisting eye injury. The district court dismissed his amended complaint for failure to state a plaus
• Helman v. State
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-19
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because it did not identify responsible individuals or allege a custom or policy causing the deprivation of rights.
• Sarmiento v. United States Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-15
  The court granted the motion to dismiss, finding the plaintiff lacked standing, the court lacked jurisdiction over several claims, and the plaintiff failed to state a claim for unjust enrichment.
• Raymond v. Hillsborough Cnty.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-14
  The court granted the motion to dismiss, finding all of the plaintiff's claims barred by the Heck doctrine, lack of probable cause, or failure to state a cognizable claim.
• LaHanse v. Abrahamsen
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-13
  A prisoner's § 1983 claim for damages from an allegedly unlawful search and seizure must be dismissed if a judgment in their favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of their conviction or sentence, unless that conviction or sentence has already been invalidated.
• Cole v. Davis
  N.D. Fla.· 2024-11-13 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  The court held that a prisoner's failure to accurately disclose prior litigation history on a court form constitutes abuse of the judicial process, warranting dismissal of the case without prejudice.
• Pastrana v. State
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-13
  The court held that a pro se plaintiff cannot file on behalf of another party and that a judge is entitled to absolute judicial immunity for actions taken in her judicial capacity.
• Achille v. Bynum
  N.D. Fla.· 2024-11-12 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  A prisoner's failure to accurately disclose prior litigation history on a court-approved complaint form, even if unintentional, constitutes a malicious abuse of the judicial process warranting dismissal.
• Smith v. Rosado
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-11-11
  The court held that the pro se plaintiff's complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• Glenn v. Smith
  N.D. Fla.· 2024-11-08 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  The court held that a prisoner who is a 'three-striker' cannot proceed in forma pauperis without alleging imminent danger, and the current claim is barred by res judicata.
• White v. Eslinger
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-07 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  The court held that a party must attend a deposition even if a motion for a protective order is pending, and awarded costs for the missed deposition.
• Macker v. Macker
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-07
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion to file a second amended complaint because the plaintiff failed to show good cause for the late filing and the proposed amendments would be futile and violate a prior court order.
• Hill v. McNeil
  N.D. Fla.· 2024-11-04
  The court held that a plaintiff's failure to serve a defendant, despite multiple warnings and extensions, warrants dismissal of the claim without prejudice.
• Johnson v. Centurion of Fla. LLC
  N.D. Fla.· 2024-10-31
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim under the Eighth Amendment and § 1983 against the healthcare provider, as the allegations did not demonstrate deliberate indifference or a policy/custom causing the delay in medical treatment.
• Bienaime v. Dep't of Child. & Families
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-10-29 ·via Section 1983
  The court granted the Department of Children and Families' motion to stay discovery and all deadlines as to that defendant, finding its motion to dismiss appeared clearly meritorious and case dispositive.
• Roe v. Fryer
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-10-25 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Excessive Force)
  Travis Roe sued Sheriff Michelle Cook and Deputies Clint Redmond and Mark Maertz for excessive force and related claims arising from his arrest in August 2020 for murder. The court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on the excessive force and failure to intervene
• Chambliss v. Baggett
  N.D. Fla.· 2024-10-25
  The court held that a plaintiff must allege a violation of a federal right to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and there is no federal right to police investigation.