42 U.S.C. § 1983

12,666 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 447 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Hardigree v. Lofton
  992 F.3d 1216· 11th Cir.· 2021-04-06 ·cited 47×
  The court held that disputed facts regarding probable cause and exigent circumstances precluded summary judgment for the officer on the unlawful entry claim, but also prevented granting the officer qualified immunity.
• Penley v. Eslinger
  605 F.3d 843· 11th Cir.· 2010-05-03 ·cited 47×
  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
• Alfonson Detroy Ponton and Reginald J. Williams v. Officer B.E. Gross
  576 So. 2d 910· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-03-26 ·cited 47×
  Appellants filed a timely notice of appeal from a trial court order requiring them to file an amended complaint by a deadline, but the appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because no final appealable order had been rendered.
• Colonial Pipeline Co. v. Collins
  921 F.2d 1237· 11th Cir.· 1991-01-22 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the Tax Injunction Act does not bar federal jurisdiction if the plaintiff demonstrates that state remedies for tax challenges are inadequate, and that the district court erred by dismissing the case without a full factual inquiry into the adequacy of Georgia's
• Hufford v. Rodgers
  912 F.2d 1338· 11th Cir.· 1990-09-25 ·cited 47×
  The Eleventh Amendment does not protect Florida sheriffs, acting as county officials, from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Dorna F. Kerr v. City OF W. Palm Beach
  875 F.2d 1546· 11th Cir.· 1989-06-27 ·cited 47×
  The court held that plaintiffs lacked standing to seek injunctive and declaratory relief regarding the canine unit policy, but that the district court erred in granting judgment n.o.v. for the City and former chief, as there was sufficient evidence of inadequate training and supe
• Nat'l Broad. Co., Inc. v. Commc'ns Workers OF Am., AFL-CIO
  860 F.2d 1022· 11th Cir.· 1988-11-28 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the appeal was not moot because the "capable of repetition, yet evading review" exception applied, allowing review of the "temporary restraining order" despite the appellant's compliance.
• Kurtz v. Vickrey
  855 F.2d 723· 11th Cir.· 1988-09-19 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a triable issue of fact regarding constitutionally protected speech and causation, thus summary judgment for the defendant was appropriate.
• Jordan v. Multnomah Cnty.
  815 F.2d 1258· 9th Cir.· 1987-04-24 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by failing to adequately explain its fee calculations and that the denial of a multiplier was not an abuse of discretion.
• Brooks v. D.R. Scheib
  813 F.2d 1191· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-06 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish that the City's customs or policies were the moving force behind the constitutional injury or that the officer's alleged violent propensity constituted a continuous condition for nuisance law.
• Hamilton v. V.E. Rodgers
  791 F.2d 439· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-13 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the Fire Department could not be held liable under § 1983 for employee discrimination absent official policy or custom, and that compensatory damages for physical decline were not sufficiently proven. However, supervisors were liable under Title VII and § 1983
• 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.
• Beard v. O'Neal
  728 F.2d 894· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-22 ·cited 47×
  The court affirmed summary judgment for O'Neal, finding no constitutional duty to intervene and no active participation in Beard's death. Supervisory FBI officers were also granted summary judgment.
• Lewis v. Univ. OF Pittsburgh & Univ. of Pittsburgh Book Ctr.
  725 F.2d 910· 3d Cir.· 1983-12-30 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the trial court's jury instructions, which focused solely on 'but-for' causation and failed to adequately explain the indirect method of proving discrimination through pretext, constituted plain error requiring a new trial.
• Wellington v. Daniels
  717 F.2d 932· 4th Cir.· 1983-09-19 ·cited 47×
  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.
• Hanson Bratton v. City OF Detroit
  704 F.2d 878· 6th Cir.· 1983-03-29 ·cited 47×
• Vicel Herron v. James G. Beck J.J. Culpepper
  693 F.2d 125· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-06 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the district court erred by converting a motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment without providing the required ten-day notice to the pro se plaintiff.
• Westborough Mall, Inc. v. City OF Cape Girardeau
  693 F.2d 733· 8th Cir.· 1982-11-12 ·cited 47×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether the city deprived developers of zoning rights without due process and whether city officials conspired with private developers to restrain trade.
• Deweese v. Town OF Palm Beach
  688 F.2d 731· 11th Cir.· 1982-10-08 ·cited 47×
  The district court abused its discretion by applying collateral estoppel to prevent the town from litigating the constitutionality of its shirtlessness ordinance.
• Merrel J. Cline v. Brusett
  661 F.2d 108· 9th Cir.· 1981-11-09 ·cited 47×
  The court held that most of the appellant's claims were barred by the statute of limitations, but two claims related to a second conviction were not. The court affirmed the dismissal of most claims and reversed the dismissal of two claims, remanding for further proceedings.
• Tarter v. Hury
  646 F.2d 1010· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-01 ·cited 47×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of most claims, finding some barred by immunity and exhaustion requirements, and others failing to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• McMILLAN v. Escambia Cnty.
  638 F.2d 1239· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-19 ·cited 47×
  At-large election systems are unconstitutional if purposefully designed or perpetuated to minimize the voting strength of racial minorities and have that effect. The County Commission's at-large system was not shown to be perpetuated for discriminatory purposes, but the School Bo
• Bruce v. Riddle
  631 F.2d 272· 4th Cir.· 1980-09-10 ·cited 47×
  Members of a local county council are entitled to absolute legislative immunity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for actions taken in their legislative capacity, including voting on zoning ordinances, even if influenced by private meetings with constituents.
• Riddell v. The Nat'l Democratic Party
  624 F.2d 539· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-18 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the special circumstances cited by the district court were insufficient to justify denying attorneys' fees to the prevailing parties under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Gordon v. Watson
  622 F.2d 120· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-21 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because the submitted materials were insufficient to resolve factual disputes regarding punitive confinement.
• Murrell v. Bennett
  615 F.2d 306· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-10 ·cited 47×
  Summary judgment was prematurely granted because genuine issues of material fact existed and the pro se plaintiff's discovery requests were improperly denied.
• Turpin v. Mailet
  591 F.2d 426· 2d Cir.· 1979-01-16 ·cited 47×
  The court held that a cause of action against a municipality may exist under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, superseding a direct claim under the 14th Amendment.
• Feeley v. Sampson
  570 F.2d 364· 1st Cir.· 1978-01-18 ·cited 47×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority's standard for evaluating conditions of confinement for pretrial detainees is too deferential and rejects established case law.
• Jacobson v. Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency
  566 F.2d 1353· 9th Cir.· 1977-12-21 ·cited 47×
  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
• Alive v. Litzau
  551 F.2d 196· 8th Cir.· 1977-02-23 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the $10,000 jury verdict for compensatory damages was not inadequate as a matter of law, and the directed verdict for the police chief was proper.
• Levoy Jasper Meredith v. State OF Ariz.
  523 F.2d 481· 9th Cir.· 1975-09-30 ·cited 47×
  The concurring judge agrees with the dismissal of claims against the State and prison physician but dissents from the reversal of the dismissal of claims against Correctional Officer Miller and the remand for further consideration of claims against other prison officials.
• Rosado v. Wyman
  414 F.2d 170· 2d Cir.· 1969-07-16 ·cited 47×
  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.
• Rosario-Torres v. Hernandez-Colon
  889 F.2d 314· 1st Cir.· 1989-11-08 ·cited 46×
  The court held that public employees, even if hired in violation of technical regulations, acquire a constitutionally protected property interest in their jobs once hired and performing their duties, entitling them to due process before termination.
• Finch v. City OF Vernon
  877 F.2d 1497· 11th Cir.· 1989-07-21 ·cited 46×
  The court affirmed judgments for retaliatory discharge and battery, vacated a defamation damages award for a new trial, and affirmed other judgments notwithstanding the verdict.
• Eutzy v. State
  541 So. 2d 1143· Fla.· 1989-03-28 ·cited 46×
  William Eutzy, a death row inmate, appealed the trial court's denial of his second Rule 3.850 motion to vacate his conviction and death sentence for first-degree murder. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial, holding that all claims were procedurally barred either because
• Patterson v. Portch
  853 F.2d 1399· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-03 ·cited 46×
  The court held that Patterson's appeal from the grant of summary judgment to Fort must be dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction, but affirmed the injunction ordering a new hearing before Portch. The court also discussed the principles of due process, property rights in pub
• Ishmael Jaffree v. Wallace
  837 F.2d 1461· 11th Cir.· 1988-01-22 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the doctrine of res judicata barred the plaintiffs' action because the issues and parties were sufficiently identical to a prior litigation, and the district court did not err in denying the motion to recuse.
• Howland v. Kilquist
  833 F.2d 639· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-09 ·cited 46×
  The court held that a prisoner must show actual or probable detriment to prove denial of meaningful access to the courts, and that a transfer was not retaliatory if based on established procedure.
• Lake Nacimiento Ranch Co. v. Cnty. OF SAN Luis Obispo
  830 F.2d 977· 9th Cir.· 1987-10-15 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the Ranch's "as applied" taking claim was not ripe, its facial challenge was unsupported, and its due process claim failed due to adequate state remedies and lack of municipal policy. The denial of attorneys' fees to the County was not an abuse of discretion.
• Jacquez v. R.K. Procunier
  801 F.2d 789· 5th Cir.· 1986-10-10 ·cited 46×
  A plaintiff must plead specific facts demonstrating a violation of clearly established law to overcome a qualified immunity defense and avoid dismissal before discovery.
• Anton v. Lehpamer
  787 F.2d 1141· 7th Cir.· 1986-04-03 ·cited 46×
  The court held that Wilson v. Garcia, which established the personal injury statute of limitations for § 1983 actions, should be applied partially retroactively in Illinois. Plaintiffs whose causes of action accrued before Wilson must file within the shorter of five years from ac
• Holloway v. Judge Dee Brown Walker
  765 F.2d 517· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-18 ·cited 46×
• Aldridge v. Montgomery
  753 F.2d 970· 11th Cir.· 1985-02-21 ·cited 46×
  The court held that a jury issue existed regarding whether prison officials were deliberately indifferent to an inmate's serious medical needs, both before and after conviction.
• Solomon Lusby v. T.G. & Y. Stores, Inc.
  749 F.2d 1423· 10th Cir.· 1984-11-23 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the jury's verdicts for civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the defendants were largely supported by the evidence, and that the plaintiffs substantially complied with the Oklahoma Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act notice requirement.
• 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.
• Karole K. Jensen v. Conrad
  747 F.2d 185· 4th Cir.· 1984-10-05 ·cited 46×
  The court held that even if a constitutional right to affirmative protection existed, it was not clearly established at the time of the alleged deprivations, and good faith immunity applied.
• N.A.A.C.P. v. City OF Richmond
  743 F.2d 1346· 9th Cir.· 1984-09-28 ·cited 46×
  The Ninth Circuit held that the City of Richmond's 20-day advance notice requirement for parade permits violates the First Amendment and that the waiver provision granting unfettered discretion is unconstitutional.
• McKENZIE v. Lamb
  738 F.2d 1005· 9th Cir.· 1984-07-24 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the officers lacked probable cause for the felony arrest and that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the excessive force claim. The court affirmed summary judgment for Clifford Hazelton.
• 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.
• White v. Vathally
  732 F.2d 1037· 1st Cir.· 1984-05-01 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial testimony alone was sufficient to support the finding that the defendants lacked discriminatory intent, and that the plaintiff failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendants' articulated reason was a pretext for discrimination