42 U.S.C. § 1983

12,720 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 457 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Genusa v. D.J. Mumphrey, Jr.
  931 F.2d 11· 5th Cir.· 1991-05-13
  The court held that there is no constitutional right requiring a government employer to pay wages for days an employee misses work to respond to a federal court subpoena, and thus no basis for a § 1983 claim or § 1988 attorney fees.
• Jeffers v. Heavrin
  932 F.2d 1160· 6th Cir.· 1991-05-13
  The court held that the warrantless search of a patron's allergy pill bottle at the Kentucky Derby was illegal because it exceeded the scope of the search policy and was not justified by implied consent.
• Michaud v. Michaud
  932 F.2d 77· 1st Cir.· 1991-05-06
  The court held that the district court erred in confirming a settlement without giving the plaintiff a reasonable opportunity to be heard on the issue of whether he had authorized the settlement.
• Christy v. Randlett
  932 F.2d 502· 6th Cir.· 1991-05-03 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  The court held that the denial of a building permit was based on the enforcement of a constitutionally valid zoning ordinance, not a violation of the plaintiff's First Amendment rights.
• Hopkins v. City OF Sierra Vista
  931 F.2d 524· 9th Cir.· 1991-05-02
  The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate because there was a genuine dispute of material fact regarding probable cause for the warrantless entry. The award of attorneys' fees was reversed as there was no prevailing party.
• Marriott v. Smith
  931 F.2d 517· 8th Cir.· 1991-05-01
  The prison visitor exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement does not apply to a search conducted after the visitor has finished their visit and is no longer in a position to smuggle contraband into the jail.
• Vanguard Ins. Co. v. ST. Johns Cnty.
  578 So. 2d 1132· Fla. 5th DCA· 1991-04-04
  Vanguard Insurance Company appeals a summary judgment awarding St. Johns County reimbursement for amounts paid to settle a Section 1983 civil rights lawsuit against its sheriff. The court holds that the county may pursue equitable subrogation against the insurer for the damage aw
• Reese Gwillim v. City OF SAN Jose
  929 F.2d 465· 9th Cir.· 1991-03-25
  The transmission of immunized testimony to a prosecutor by administrators who obtained it, in accordance with state law, does not in itself violate the privilege against self-incrimination, absent a showing that the administrators knew or should have anticipated the prosecutor's
• Johnson v. City of Tarpon Springs
  758 F. Supp. 1473· M.D. Fla.· 1991-03-19
  Summary judgment for the defendant is granted because the plaintiff's claims are barred by preclusion from a prior administrative hearing, and the plaintiff failed to establish essential elements of his civil rights claims.
• In re Padraic Cook
  928 F.2d 262· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-12
  The court held that the dismissal of the pro se plaintiff's claims against the Sheriff and City was proper, but the dismissal of the claim against Nurse Montgomery was improper.
• Hood v. City OF Chicago
  927 F.2d 312· 7th Cir.· 1991-03-11
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the plaintiff's § 1983 claim because the availability of adequate state tort remedies, such as false arrest and imprisonment, satisfied the requirements of procedural due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Pestrak v. Ohio Elections Comm'n
  926 F.2d 573· 6th Cir.· 1991-02-27
  The court held that while the Ohio Elections Commission's power to levy fines and issue cease and desist orders is unconstitutional, its powers to investigate, refer for prosecution, and declare the truthfulness of statements are constitutional.
• Arnold v. Lantz McCLAIN
  926 F.2d 963· 10th Cir.· 1991-02-21
  A district attorney is entitled to absolute prosecutorial immunity for actions taken to secure a resignation in exchange for dropping criminal charges, and a plaintiff cannot establish a liberty interest claim based on stigmatizing statements if the information was already public
• United Cos. Fin. Corp. v. Mellon Fin. Servs. Corp. # 7
  922 F.2d 270· 5th Cir.· 1991-01-30
  The court held that the trial court's finding that the inferior mortgage holder received adequate notice of the foreclosure sale was not clearly erroneous.
• Elliott C. Cunningham v. Southlake Ctr. FOR Mental Health, Inc.
  924 F.2d 106· 7th Cir.· 1991-01-25
  A private employer is not liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for terminating an employee based on speech, even if the employee reported misconduct, unless there is sufficient state involvement or joint action with a shared unconstitutional purpose.
• Laurence K. Burgin v. Iowa Dep't OF Corr.
  923 F.2d 637· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-22 ·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's finding that correctional officers used excessive force violating the Eighth Amendment and rejected the defendants' claims of qualified immunity.
• Scott v. Williams
  924 F.2d 56· 4th Cir.· 1991-01-22
  The court held that Virginia's procedures for suspending a driver's license based on a medical director's report of drug addiction, followed by prompt reinstatement procedures, satisfy the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Goad v. Rollins
  921 F.2d 69· 5th Cir.· 1991-01-18
  The court held that the appeal was frivolous, dismissed it, and imposed monetary sanctions against the appellant.
• Gonzalez v. Martinez
  756 F. Supp. 1533· S.D. Fla.· 1991-01-18
  The court held that while the Protection and Advocacy Act requires exhaustion of administrative remedies where appropriate, the specific remedies cited by the defendants were inadequate, and the plaintiff's failure to exhaust did not warrant summary judgment at this stage.
• Anton Jungherr v. SAN Francisco U.S.D. Bd. OF Educ.
  923 F.2d 743· 9th Cir.· 1991-01-17
  Filing a defamation action by a government entity does not violate a defendant's First Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as the existing constitutional limitations on defamation law provide sufficient protection.
• Dobson v. Magnusson
  923 F.2d 229· 1st Cir.· 1991-01-17
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to show deliberate indifference by the prison officers, thus affirming the grant of summary judgment.
• Richardson v. Town OF Eastover
  922 F.2d 1152· 4th Cir.· 1991-01-14
  The court held that the town's refusal to renew the nightclub license did not violate due process because the owner received adequate notice and opportunity to be heard, and the property interest was minimal.
• Berkovich v. Winslow Hicks
  922 F.2d 1018· 2d Cir.· 1991-01-04
• Marsh v. Skinner
  922 F.2d 112· 2d Cir.· 1990-12-26
  The court held that a plaintiff seeking benefits under the Urban Mass Transportation Act's Half-Fare Program must meet the Act's specific definition of 'handicapped person,' not a broader definition from another statute, and that the program's funding source dictates applicable p
• Leopold Lee Pedraza v. Dalton G. Meyer
  919 F.2d 317· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-17
  The court affirmed dismissal of most claims but vacated and remanded the Eighth Amendment inadequate medical attention claim for a hearing and trial.
• Brown v. City OF Lake Geneva & Audrey Milliette
  919 F.2d 1299· 7th Cir.· 1990-12-13
  The court held that the ordinance did not violate the Equal Protection or Due Process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, nor did it conflict with Wisconsin state law.
• Renbarger v. Lockhart
  921 F.2d 1032· 10th Cir.· 1990-12-11
  The court held that the exclusion of testimony regarding county custom was not error because the appellant lacked a protected property interest, and directed verdicts for the assistant district attorney and neighbor were proper as no constitutional rights were violated.
• Bone v. City OF Lafayette
  919 F.2d 64· 7th Cir.· 1990-11-28
  The court held that the statement that the plaintiff lied was substantially true because a prior state court judgment established that her application for a building permit contained a false certification regarding compliance with local ordinances. Therefore, the defamation claim
• Fallon v. A.L. Lockhart
  919 F.2d 1304· 8th Cir.· 1990-11-26
• Howard v. The City OF Garland
  917 F.2d 898· 5th Cir.· 1990-11-23
  The court held that the zoning ordinance requiring a special use permit for commercial home day care serving more than four nonresident children is rationally related to legitimate governmental interests and does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Howze v. City OF Austin
  917 F.2d 208· 5th Cir.· 1990-11-19
  The court held that the plaintiff presented insufficient evidence to support a jury finding that he ever requested a hearing.
• Florentino Leal v. J.A. Szoeke
  917 F.2d 206· 5th Cir.· 1990-11-19
  A claimant must exhaust administrative remedies with the Railroad Retirement Board before appealing an adverse determination of benefits, and such appeals must be filed in the court of appeals, not the district court.
• Lenora B. Fulani v. Hogsett
  917 F.2d 1028· 7th Cir.· 1990-11-08
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claim was barred by laches due to their unreasonable delay in filing suit after the election irregularities were public knowledge and absentee voting had commenced.
• Davis v. City OF Charleston
  917 F.2d 1502· 8th Cir.· 1990-11-02
  The court held that the trial court erred in awarding attorney's fees to the defendant police officers because the plaintiff's civil rights claims were not shown to be frivolous, unfounded, or vexatiously brought.
• Kasib Tauheed Bilal v. Davis
  918 F.2d 723· 8th Cir.· 1990-11-02
• Toussaint v. McCARTHY
  918 F.2d 752· 9th Cir.· 1990-10-30
  The court held that the district court erred in continuing the monitor's appointment, prohibiting polygraph examinations, and mandating 90-day review periods for segregation decisions, but affirmed the requirement for the Criminal Activities Coordinator to hear prisoner views.
• Alyson A. Habetz v. La. High Sch. Athletic Ass'n
  915 F.2d 164· 5th Cir.· 1990-10-25
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction, and therefore, the case should be remanded to determine if plaintiffs are entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Smith v. Margarett Bingham
  914 F.2d 740· 5th Cir.· 1990-10-18
  The court held that the prison's policy of excluding male inmates from vocational training classes offered to female inmates did not violate the Equal Protection Clause, as it was substantially related to the important governmental objective of maintaining prison security.
• MRS. C. on her own behalf and as mother and guardian v. Wheaton
  916 F.2d 69· 2d Cir.· 1990-10-16
  The state must comply with EHA procedural safeguards before terminating the educational placement of a handicapped student aged 18-21 based on the student's consent; otherwise, the consent is ineffective.
• Fraternal Order OF Police v. Mayor & City Council OF Ocean City
  916 F.2d 919· 4th Cir.· 1990-10-15
  A city charter provision prohibiting officials from recognizing collective bargaining organizations does not violate the First or Fourteenth Amendments, either facially or as applied, because the First Amendment does not guarantee a right to collective bargaining or compel govern
• Cassidy v. State OF Haw.
  915 F.2d 528· 9th Cir.· 1990-10-01 ·via Section 1983
  The court held that a mooring permit holder's unilateral expectation of renewal based on past practice, without express state assurance, does not create a property interest protected by due process when the permit automatically expires due to prolonged absence.
• Currier v. Sergeant Charles J. Baldridge
  914 F.2d 993· 7th Cir.· 1990-10-01
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a violation of their First or Fourth Amendment rights, as the arrests were supported by probable cause and did not impermissibly burden any protected right.
• Laidley v. Lantz McCLAIN
  914 F.2d 1386· 10th Cir.· 1990-09-13
  The court held that the notice of appeal was insufficient to confer jurisdiction for most plaintiffs, but a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding whether one plaintiff was terminated due to political activity, precluding summary judgment for that plaintiff against the
• Elmore v. Corcoran
  913 F.2d 170· 4th Cir.· 1990-09-10
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by amending the pleadings to include a due process claim that was not tried by the express or implied consent of the parties.
• Mylett v. L.M. Jeane
  910 F.2d 296· 5th Cir.· 1990-09-06
  The court held that the magistrate misapplied the standard for awarding attorney's fees to prevailing defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and erred in denying reconsideration of Rule 11 sanctions against an attorney.
• Nance v. Kelly
  912 F.2d 605· 2d Cir.· 1990-08-28
  The court should affirm the dismissal of the prisoner's complaint because his claim of deliberate indifference to a serious medical need fails, and the named defendant lacked personal involvement.
• Howlett v. Rose
  571 So. 2d 29· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-08-24
  On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed its prior dismissal of a Section 1983 civil rights action brought by a minor student against a school superintendent and school board. The court held that the trial court improperly dismissed the
• Williams v. Luna
  909 F.2d 121· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-15
  The court held that the district court improperly dismissed the excessive force claim against the guards because the plaintiff adequately alleged a significant injury and the use of excessive force, and improperly made credibility determinations at the Spears hearing.
• Garza v. Honorable Mike Westergren
  908 F.2d 27· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-14
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because the underlying contempt hearing has already occurred, and the district court's denial of an injunction to prevent that hearing is the only issue on appeal. The court also awarded attorney's fees and double costs for a frivolous appeal.
• Abdul-Hakeem v. Koehler
  910 F.2d 66· 2d Cir.· 1990-08-01
  The court held that a prisoner's petition seeking a transfer of custody, even if framed as a challenge to conditions of confinement, must be treated as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus if the requested relief would require prison officials to cede custody.