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

• LEE v. W. Reserve Psychiatric Habilitation Ctr. & David A. Sorensen
  747 F.2d 1062· 6th Cir.· 1984-11-06 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim For Deprivation Of Due Process
  The court held that the plaintiff received sufficient pre-termination process to satisfy due process, and that the district court properly dismissed the complaint.
• Virgil L. Hayden, M.D. v. Calvin Bracy, M.D.
  744 F.2d 1338· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-27 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that a private hospital's disciplinary actions do not constitute state action for § 1983 claims and that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently allege an effect on interstate commerce for Sherman Act claims. The court also affirmed the dismissal of defamation and con
• Horsey v. Asher
  741 F.2d 209· 8th Cir.· 1984-08-23 ·cited 24×
  A complaint that states a claim upon which relief can be granted under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) cannot be dismissed as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) simply because the plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis.
• Sher v. Coughlin
  739 F.2d 77· 2d Cir.· 1984-07-11 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim For Damages
  A prisoner's transfer between facilities or placement in restrictive confinement for administrative reasons, even if motivated in part by punitive intent, does not violate constitutional rights if the administrative reasons alone would have justified the action.
• Students OF Cal. Sch. FOR THE Blind v. Honig
  736 F.2d 538· 9th Cir.· 1984-06-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction requiring seismic safety tests or closure of the school, as the students raised serious legal questions under federal law and the balance of hardships tipped sharply in their f
• Nanette Archer v. Dutcher
  733 F.2d 14· 2d Cir.· 1984-04-17 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the appellant's affidavit raised genuine issues of material fact regarding deliberate indifference to her serious medical needs, precluding summary judgment.
• Bellamy v. Bradley
  729 F.2d 416· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to establish a violation of the plaintiff's constitutional rights under the Eighth or Sixth Amendments, thus affirming the directed verdict.
• Crayton E. McELVEEN, Jr. v. Cnty. OF Prince William
  725 F.2d 954· 4th Cir.· 1984-01-26 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim For Cruel And Unusual Punishment
  The court held that the good-faith immunity standard for government officials includes both subjective and objective elements, and that the jury's award of compensatory damages was supported by substantial evidence.
• Leeanne Wright v. The City OF Ozark
  715 F.2d 1513· 11th Cir.· 1983-09-26 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  The court held that the due process clause does not impose liability on state officers for failing to protect a member of the public from the criminal acts of a third person, absent a special relationship.
• Ohio Contractors Ass'n v. Keip
  713 F.2d 167· 6th Cir.· 1983-07-12 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's judgment because Ohio's Minority Business Enterprise Act is constitutionally flawed due to its lack of durational limitations.
• Casey v. Carmine Depetrillo
  697 F.2d 22· 1st Cir.· 1983-01-10 ·cited 24×
  A mere breach of a contractual right by a state actor does not constitute a deprivation of property without due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Pazie Connors v. Patrolman Joseph McNULTY
  697 F.2d 18· 1st Cir.· 1983-01-07 ·cited 24×
  The court held that while the jury instructions on the good faith defense were erroneous, the error was not prejudicial because the jury's finding of no liability under state law meant the good faith defense was never reached.
• Maudotha R. White v. Wash. Pub. Power Supply Sys.
  692 F.2d 1286· 9th Cir.· 1982-11-23 ·cited 24×·via Discrimination Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that the trial court erred in allocating the burden of proof in a Title VII disparate treatment case and in awarding punitive damages under certain statutes, requiring reversal and remand for a new trial.
• Clovis Carl Green, Jr. v. White
  693 F.2d 45· 8th Cir.· 1982-11-17 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a hearing on a summary judgment motion held less than 10 days after filing does not constitute reversible error if the non-moving party did not object and was not prejudiced. Furthermore, the court held that under the objective standard for qualified immunity
• NEW England Accessories Trade Ass'n, Inc. v. City OF Nashua
  679 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1982-05-24 ·cited 24×
  The court held that neither the City of Nashua's drug paraphernalia ordinance nor New Hampshire's drug paraphernalia statute are unconstitutionally vague or overbroad.
• Tandy Richardson, Jr. v. The City OF Indianapolis
  658 F.2d 494· 7th Cir.· 1981-08-25 ·cited 24×
• Mitchum v. Purvis
  650 F.2d 647· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-13 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a prisoner's section 1983 action cannot be summarily dismissed for docket control or to discourage suits, even if the prisoner has been transferred from the facility where the alleged violations occurred.
• Flint v. Haynes
  651 F.2d 970· 4th Cir.· 1981-06-19 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Litigation
  A district court may assess costs against civil rights litigants who have been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).
• Major v. Ned Benton
  647 F.2d 110· 10th Cir.· 1981-04-13 ·cited 24×
  A death resulting from the negligent action of a state official does not, in itself, constitute a deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and therefore does not support a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Rev. Frank D. Lovell v. Linwood Snow
  637 F.2d 170· 1st Cir.· 1981-03-17 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  Pro se plaintiffs are not entitled to attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• MacLin v. Deputy Sheriff Paulson
  627 F.2d 83· 7th Cir.· 1980-08-07 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the pro se plaintiff's complaints against the arresting officers and Police Chief Boone, as the allegations stated actionable claims under federal civil rights law.
• Broughton v. Cutter Labs.
  622 F.2d 458· 9th Cir.· 1980-07-01 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim For Deliberate Indifference To Serious Medical Needs
  The court held that the prisoner's complaint, as currently stated, did not provide enough information to determine if it alleged deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, and thus should be remanded for an opportunity to amend.
• Eldred S. Wallace and Jeannie R. Wallace v. King
  626 F.2d 1157· 4th Cir.· 1980-07-01 ·cited 24×
  A search warrant is not constitutionally required to search a third person's premises for a suspect named in a valid arrest warrant, provided officers have a reasonable belief the suspect is present.
• Miller v. Smith
  615 F.2d 1037· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that federal courts should honor state statutes of limitations, including their tolling provisions, unless they are inconsistent with federal law.
• McMANAMA v. Lukhard
  616 F.2d 727· 4th Cir.· 1980-02-28 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction and that the award of attorneys' fees was proper, but erred in compelling an interrogatory regarding legal aid eligibility, though this error was harmless.
• Hurney v. Carver
  602 F.2d 993· 1st Cir.· 1979-07-05 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  A prisoner's pro se complaint alleging denial of due process for denied witness requests at disciplinary hearings is insufficient to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless it alleges the denial was for reasons unrelated to institutional security or correctional goals and con
• Cleamtee Garner v. Memphis Police Dep't
  600 F.2d 52· 6th Cir.· 1979-06-18 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Liability
  The court held that individual officers are immune from liability due to good faith reliance on existing Tennessee law, but the city may be liable under Monell for constitutional violations resulting from its policy or custom.
• Webster v. Redmond
  599 F.2d 793· 7th Cir.· 1979-05-22 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that the plaintiff did not possess a constitutionally protected liberty or property interest in promotion to principal, and thus was not denied due process. The court also affirmed the dismissal of racial discrimination claims.
• Campbell v. Gerrans
  592 F.2d 1054· 9th Cir.· 1979-03-07 ·cited 24×
  A trial court abuses its discretion by dismissing a civil case solely because plaintiffs invoked the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in response to specific interrogatories, as this constitutes a penalty for silence.
• McBRIDE v. Soos
  594 F.2d 610· 7th Cir.· 1979-02-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a complaint alleging abuse of the extradition power by noncompliance with applicable federal and state law states a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Preston v. Thompson
  589 F.2d 300· 7th Cir.· 1978-12-15 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by ordering immediate implementation of specific shower and recreation requirements in the context of a dangerous post-riot prison environment.
• DE LA Cruz v. Tormey
  582 F.2d 45· 9th Cir.· 1978-09-13 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  A claim for sex discrimination requires either facial discrimination or discriminatory effects; allegations of discriminatory intent alone are insufficient if the conduct is otherwise gender-neutral.
• Hastings v. Bonner
  578 F.2d 136· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-14 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
• Schachter v. Whalen
  581 F.2d 35· 2d Cir.· 1978-07-19 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that the plaintiffs' complaint failed to state a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and thus affirmed the dismissal.
• Shields v. Jackson
  570 F.2d 284· 8th Cir.· 1978-02-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court should have appointed counsel for the indigent plaintiff, whose complaint stated a cause of action, to advance the proper administration of justice.
• Ellentuck v. Klein
  570 F.2d 414· 2d Cir.· 1978-01-04 ·cited 24×
  Plaintiffs' claims challenging a building permit, variance, and state court decisions on federal civil rights grounds were barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel because the New York Court of Appeals, applying the Kovarsky doctrine, had jurisdiction under CPLR § 103(c) to
• Davids v. Stan Akers
  549 F.2d 120· 9th Cir.· 1977-01-13 ·cited 24×
  Federal courts cannot intervene in state legislative decisions regarding committee appointments, as this infringes upon the state legislature's constitutional right to determine its own rules and procedures.
• Meyer v. Frank
  550 F.2d 726· 2d Cir.· 1977-01-12 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the three-year New York statute of limitations for civil rights actions should not be tolled during the period the plaintiff pursued a remedy in state courts.
• Getty v. Reed
  547 F.2d 971· 6th Cir.· 1977-01-05 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to hear the complaints, but that the due process claims in Collis' case were insubstantial. Getty's due process claims were also insubstantial, but his First Amendment claim required further consideration.
• Lecil Hander v. SAN Jacinto Junior Coll.
  522 F.2d 204· 5th Cir.· 1975-10-29 ·cited 24×
  Jurisdiction in this case is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and Texas junior college districts are not immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment.
• Muzquiz v. City OF SAN Antonio
  520 F.2d 993· 5th Cir.· 1975-10-08 ·cited 24×
  The Pension Fund Board of Trustees is not a 'person' amenable to suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but its individual members are. The no-refund provisions of the pension statute are constitutional.
• Elliott H. Velger v. Cawley
  525 F.2d 334· 2d Cir.· 1975-09-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a stigma attached to the probationary police officer's dismissal, entitling him to a hearing to confront the allegations in his personnel file.
• Cook v. Bounds
  518 F.2d 779· 4th Cir.· 1975-06-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the prisoner's requests for appointed counsel and witnesses in his civil rights action.
• Clark v. Ziedonis
  513 F.2d 79· 7th Cir.· 1975-03-26 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Excessive Force)
  The court held that the district court's finding that the officer used excessive force was not clearly erroneous, affirming the judgment.
• Goode v. Rizzo
  506 F.2d 542· 3d Cir.· 1974-11-01 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the injunctive relief granted by the district court but vacated and remanded the award of counsel fees for further proceedings due to lack of clear explanation.
• Beauregard F. Birdwell v. Hazelwood Sch. Dist.
  491 F.2d 490· 8th Cir.· 1974-02-05 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  A probationary teacher's disruptive conduct, including inciting students and suggesting violence, can justify termination, and the teacher waived due process claims by failing to attend a properly noticed hearing.
• Am. Radio Ass'n v. Mobile S.S. Ass'n, Inc.
  483 F.2d 1· 5th Cir.· 1973-08-22 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the unions' motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin state court proceedings.
• Braden v. The Univ. OF Pittsburgh & Wesley W. Posvar
  477 F.2d 1· 3d Cir.· 1973-04-11 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
• Wilson v. Webster
  467 F.2d 1282· 9th Cir.· 1972-10-10 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Claim
  The court held that while the refusal of injunctive relief was proper due to changed circumstances, the dismissal of the claim for cancellation of arrest records was premature and required a full hearing.
• LaFLEUR v. Cleveland Bd. OF Educ.
  465 F.2d 1184· 6th Cir.· 1972-07-27 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The regulation requiring maternity leave prior to delivery is a permissible exercise of the Board's discretion and does not violate the Equal Protection Clause. However, the post-delivery waiting period lacks a rational basis.