42 U.S.C. § 1983

12,720 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 456 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Trudeau v. Wyrick
  713 F.2d 1360· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-05 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would reverse and remand, finding the jury's verdict unsupported by the instructions given and the theories submitted.
• Thompson v. L.A. Steele
  709 F.2d 381· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-11 ·cited 4×
  A state inmate's claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for negligence by state officials in losing mail is barred if an adequate remedy exists under state law.
• Pienta v. Vill. OF Schaumburg
  710 F.2d 1258· 7th Cir.· 1983-06-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Schaumburg Police Department's regulations confining employees on sick or injury leave to their homes were facially unconstitutional.
• Adams v. O.J. Keller
  713 F.2d 1195· 6th Cir.· 1983-06-22 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's denial of habeas corpus, finding the Parole Commission correctly applied the amended Federal Youth Corrections Act criteria.
• Procup v. Strickland
  567 F. Supp. 146· M.D. Fla.· 1983-06-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a litigant's repeated filing of frivolous and vexatious claims, coupled with other abuses of the judicial process, warrants an injunction prohibiting further filings.
• Cont'l Ins. Co. v. Ill. Dep't OF Transp.
  709 F.2d 471· 7th Cir.· 1983-06-08 ·cited 4×
  The Eleventh Amendment does not bar a suit seeking to declare a state's statutory liability limit unconstitutional, even if compliance might indirectly affect the state treasury, as long as the suit seeks prospective relief and not direct monetary damages from the state.
• Dickey v. Greene
  710 F.2d 1003· 4th Cir.· 1983-05-31 ·cited 4×
  A Title VII plaintiff must file an EEOC charge against the party they intend to sue, and naming only the employer in the charge is insufficient to bring individual defendants before the court.
• Home Health Servs., Inc. v. Alton B. Currie, Jr., M.D.
  706 F.2d 497· 4th Cir.· 1983-05-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there is no implied cause of action for a provider under 42 U.S.C. § 1395a.
• Smith v. William R. "Bill" Paulk
  705 F.2d 1279· 10th Cir.· 1983-04-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Oklahoma's one-year durational residency requirement for private employment agency license applicants violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, but a simple residency requirement is permissible.
• Arena DEL RIO, Inc. v. Gonzalez
  704 F.2d 27· 1st Cir.· 1983-04-12 ·cited 4×
  A breach of a permit's notice provision does not create a constitutionally cognizable property interest for purposes of a Section 1983 claim.
• Prod. & Leasing, Ltd. v. Hotel Conquistador, Inc.
  709 F.2d 21· 9th Cir.· 1983-04-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Eleventh Amendment bars suits against state officials sued in their official capacities, and the complaint failed to state a federal cause of action.
• Nely L. Johnson v. Sedley N. Stuart
  702 F.2d 193· 9th Cir.· 1983-03-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that public school teachers lacked standing to challenge the constitutionality of Oregon's textbook selection statute, but students and parents did have standing and their claims were ripe for review.
• Reichert v. Draud
  701 F.2d 1168· 6th Cir.· 1983-03-10 ·cited 4×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that the school board's decision to change a teacher's schedule would have been made regardless of her protected First Amendment activities, thus affirming the dismissal of her claim.
• McKINNEY v. Galvin
  701 F.2d 584· 6th Cir.· 1983-03-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that admitting evidence of the defendant's refusal to submit to a breathalyzer test was proper in a civil rights action, as it was relevant and not prohibited by federal or state law.
• Johnson v. Officer Swyka
  699 F.2d 675· 3d Cir.· 1983-02-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Pennsylvania six-month limitation period was improperly utilized for a § 1983 employment discrimination claim against state officers.
• Collins v. Hoke
  705 F.2d 959· 8th Cir.· 1983-02-15 ·cited 4×
  The county's application of its ordinance to Mr. Collins, requiring him to move to the county poor farm for general assistance, violates the Equal Protection Clause.
• Fujiwara v. Clark
  703 F.2d 357· 9th Cir.· 1983-02-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a belief that one could lawfully discharge an employee despite substantial protected conduct cannot be considered good faith, especially for those in positions of responsibility who are deemed to know the law.
• Ostroff v. State
  554 F. Supp. 347· M.D. Fla.· 1983-01-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claims for damages arising from the termination of Social Security benefits, due to the Social Security Act's limitations and Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity.
• Green Miller, Jr. v. Barry
  698 F.2d 1259· D.C. Cir.· 1983-01-28 ·cited 4×
  A municipality cannot be held liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or a Bivens action based solely on respondeat superior; the plaintiff must allege that an official policy caused the constitutional violation.
• Ozell Jones v. Wichita State Univ. & Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Ass'n
  698 F.2d 1082· 10th Cir.· 1983-01-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim that NCAA eligibility rules violated the Equal Protection Clause did not present a substantial federal question, and even if it did, the rules were rationally related to legitimate objectives.
• Am. Re-Insurance Co. v. The Ins. Comm'r OF the State OF Cal.
  696 F.2d 1267· 9th Cir.· 1983-01-21 ·cited 4×
  A reinsurer does not have a statutory duty to pursue settlement of claims against a policyholder, nor does excluding reinsured policies from such a duty violate equal protection.
• David Yashon, M.D. v. William E. Hunt, M.D.
  696 F.2d 468· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred by assuming the existence of a protected property or liberty interest without making the required initial determination. The case is remanded for this determination.
• Manecke v. SCH. BD. of Pinellas Cnty.
  553 F. Supp. 787· M.D. Fla.· 1982-12-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 does not provide for private damage actions, and Section 504 rights cannot be asserted under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for damages.
• S. Fla. Chapter of the Associated Gen. Contractors of Am., Inc. v. Metro. Dade Cnty.
  552 F. Supp. 909· S.D. Fla.· 1982-12-16 ·cited 4×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  The court held that the 'set-aside' provision of the county's race-conscious ordinance, which limited competition for certain contracts exclusively among Black contractors, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, but the 'goals' provision, setting a perc
• Williams v. Morris
  697 F.2d 1349· 10th Cir.· 1982-12-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the availability of a state court remedy for negligent loss of property by prison employees satisfies due process requirements for a section 1983 claim.
• Simmons v. S.C. State Ports Auth.
  694 F.2d 63· 4th Cir.· 1982-11-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the employees' claims for retroactive pension credit were time-barred, and that their subsequent motion to review the settlement compliance report was untimely.
• Wolkenstein v. Reville
  694 F.2d 35· 2d Cir.· 1982-11-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Superintendent Reville's role in evaluating objections to strike participation determinations did not violate due process, as he lacked a disqualifying personal or institutional interest and his decisions were subject to judicial review.
• Lake Butler Apparel Co. v. Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs.
  551 F. Supp. 901· M.D. Fla.· 1982-11-18 ·cited 4×
  Vehicular searches conducted by the Florida Department of Agriculture under § 570.15, based solely on a vehicle being signaled to stop and the driver refusing consent, violate the Fourth Amendment's probable cause requirement.
• Miller v. Hartwood Apts., Ltd.
  689 F.2d 1239· 5th Cir.· 1982-10-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's dismissal was proper because the appellants failed to demonstrate sufficient federal action to support their § 1983 claim, despite the inapplicability of res judicata.
• Neal v. Crawford A. Howell & The City of Rock Hill
  689 F.2d 473· 4th Cir.· 1982-09-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that even if a plaintiff's protected conduct was a motivating factor in an adverse employment decision, the employer can prevail if they demonstrate the same decision would have been made regardless of the protected conduct.
• Desris v. The City OF Kenosha
  687 F.2d 1117· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-09 ·cited 4×
  Firefighters participating in two different pension plans are not similarly situated for Equal Protection purposes, even if they hold the same job title.
• Cozart v. Winfield
  687 F.2d 1058· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-02 ·cited 4×
  A township regulation imposing a thirty-day waiting period for General Assistance benefits for those terminated for cause is permissible under Illinois law and does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process or Equal Protection clauses.
• Zarko Sekerez v. Supreme Court OF Ind.
  685 F.2d 202· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that federal courts should abstain from interfering with ongoing state disciplinary proceedings against an attorney when the state has a sufficient interest and the proceedings provide an opportunity to raise constitutional claims, absent bad faith or harassment.
• Consumers Union OF United States, Inc. v. Va. State BAR
  688 F.2d 218· 4th Cir.· 1982-08-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Virginia State Bar, by virtue of its enforcement role, was liable for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and the district court abused its discretion in finding special circumstances to deny such an award. The award of attorney's fees against the Virg
• Buddy J. Loftin v. Thomas
  681 F.2d 364· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-26 ·cited 4×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  A prisoner's claim for lost property under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is barred if an adequate state remedy exists, as the state remedy itself satisfies due process requirements.
• Freier v. NEW York Life Ins. Co.
  679 F.2d 780· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's Sherman Antitrust claim was barred by the McCarran-Ferguson Act and also failed to state a claim, and that her § 1983 and conversion claims failed for lack of state action and applicability of precedent, respectively.
• Nat'l W. Life Ins. Co. v. Commodore Cove Improvement Dist.
  678 F.2d 24· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-07 ·cited 4×
  A local regulation requiring property owners to install bulkheads on waterfront lots is a constitutional exercise of police power, does not constitute a taking without just compensation, and does not violate equal protection.
• Williams v. Taylor
  677 F.2d 510· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-04 ·cited 4×
  Summary judgment was appropriate on the procedural due process and pardon claims, but the case must be remanded for a trial on the selective disenfranchisement claim.
• Herlinda Espino v. City OF Kingsville
  676 F.2d 1075· 5th Cir.· 1982-05-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and that the city could not be held liable under a theory of respondeat superior. Evidentiary rulings were also found not to be reversible error.
• Walker v. Lockhart
  678 F.2d 68· 8th Cir.· 1982-05-19 ·cited 4×
  The court granted the inmate's petition for an injunction pending appeal, requiring prison officials to maintain his current conditions of confinement.
• Ryan v. Mansfield State Coll.
  677 F.2d 344· 3d Cir.· 1982-05-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the college president had the authority to accept faculty resignations without Board of Trustees approval, reversing the lower court's finding of a due process violation.
• Whittle v. Delter Wiseman
  683 F.2d 1128· 8th Cir.· 1982-04-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred by not considering the Arkansas saving statute when dismissing the plaintiff's refiled action.
• Shanker v. Helsby
  676 F.2d 31· 2d Cir.· 1982-04-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the statutory scheme and its application did not violate the Equal Protection Clause, as the differences in penalties between administrative bodies were rationally related to legitimate state interests and lacked invidious intent.
• Buffalo Teachers Fed'n, Inc. v. Helsby
  676 F.2d 28· 2d Cir.· 1982-04-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the dues checkoff forfeiture provision of the Taylor Law, as applied, does not violate the Equal Protection Clause because the distinction between PERB and mini-PERBs has a rational basis and the application was not discriminatory.
• Jureczki v. The City OF Seabrook
  668 F.2d 851· 5th Cir.· 1982-02-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's complaint without an adequate hearing and without considering the Younger v. Harris abstention doctrine after state proceedings had concluded.
• Loyal Eugene Blair v. Supreme Court OF the State OF Wyo.
  671 F.2d 389· 10th Cir.· 1982-02-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for unconstitutional deprivation of parental rights, as the state court proceedings were constitutionally adequate and issues were precluded from relitigation.
• Sovereign News Co. v. Falke
  674 F.2d 484· 6th Cir.· 1982-02-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court had too narrowly construed the Ohio Supreme Court's opinion regarding the obscenity statute's constitutionality.
• Hejl v. The State OF Tex.
  664 F.2d 1273· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the plaintiff's action with prejudice due to a clear record of delay and contumacious conduct.
• Ward v. Johnson
  667 F.2d 1126· 4th Cir.· 1981-12-30 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the presiding officer in administrative proceedings is immune from personal liability under § 1983 for evidentiary rulings.
• Berry v. Battey
  666 F.2d 1183· 8th Cir.· 1981-12-15 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the jury verdict, holding that the district court did not err in its evidentiary rulings, application of the statute of limitations, or jury instructions regarding the First Amendment claim.