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

• Taylor v. Nichols
  558 F.2d 561· 10th Cir.· 1977-06-30 ·cited 35×
  A special prosecutor is entitled to the same absolute immunity as a state prosecutor, and county commissioners are entitled to qualified immunity if they act in good faith and within their discretion.
• French v. Heyne
  547 F.2d 994· 7th Cir.· 1976-12-22 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the dismissal of the inmates' claims regarding vocational training limitations and the prohibition on soliciting funds for educational programs was improper, as these claims stated a potential violation of the Equal Protection and First Amendments, respectivel
• Mrs. Carnell Russ v. Ratliff
  538 F.2d 799· 8th Cir.· 1976-07-27 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the police officer used excessive force in shooting the decedent, and the jury verdict exonerating him could not stand. The court also affirmed the dismissal of claims against other defendants.
• Ingraham v. Wright
  525 F.2d 909· 5th Cir.· 1976-01-08 ·cited 35×
  The dissenting judges maintain that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment applies to corporal punishment administered to public school children under color of state law. They argue that the availability of state remedies does not preclude federal
• Cook v. Whiteside
  505 F.2d 32· 5th Cir.· 1974-12-16 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the inmate's pro se complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983.
• Duke v. The State OF Tex.
  477 F.2d 244· 5th Cir.· 1973-04-20 ·cited 35×
  Federal injunctive relief against state judicial proceedings is not prohibited where state procedures are inadequate to protect federal rights and prevent irreparable harm.
• Morales v. Schmidt
  489 F.2d 1335· 7th Cir.· 1973-01-17 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the record did not adequately justify the prison's ad hoc decision to prohibit all communication between an inmate and his wife's sister, as it lacked support from regulations and failed to demonstrate necessity over less drastic alternatives.
• Jackson v. Duke
  259 F.2d 3· 5th Cir.· 1958-08-27 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the amended complaint correcting a misnomer related back to the original filing date for statute of limitations purposes, and that the original complaint sufficiently alleged federal jurisdiction.
• Jayne Swinford v. Santos
  121 F.4th 179· 11th Cir.· 2024-11-04 ·cited 34×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court properly considered body camera footage under the incorporation-by-reference doctrine when ruling on a motion to dismiss, and that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity.
• Elliott v. Thomas
  937 F.2d 338· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-15 ·cited 34×
  A defendant's denial of wrongdoing is not a collateral issue and thus not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine; qualified immunity protects officials from trial when the law was not clearly established.
• Melo v. Hafer
  912 F.2d 628· 3d Cir.· 1990-08-21 ·cited 34×
  A § 1983 claim for reinstatement can be brought against a state official in her official capacity, and damage claims can be brought against her in her individual capacity. A private party cannot be held liable under § 1983 for conspiring with a state official if the official was
• Reynaldo Huguet v. Barnett
  900 F.2d 838· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-11 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the inmate's Section 1983 excessive force claim under the Eighth Amendment standard, as the plaintiff failed to prove the necessary elements.
• Triad Assocs., Inc. v. Chicago Hous. Auth.
  892 F.2d 583· 7th Cir.· 1990-02-15 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a due process violation may be precluded by adequate state post-deprivation remedies, and that a conspiracy claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) can encompass animus against white individuals.
• Polenz v. Parrott
  883 F.2d 551· 7th Cir.· 1989-08-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that while the denial of a tavern license did not implicate a protected property interest, the denial of an occupancy permit did, and the case must be remanded to determine if state remedies were inadequate before addressing qualified immunity.
• Bieneman v. City OF Chicago
  864 F.2d 463· 7th Cir.· 1988-12-13 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying class certification and that the plaintiff's claims were time-barred. The court also overruled prior precedent on federal preemption of state tort claims related to airport noise.
• Brawner v. City OF Richardson
  855 F.2d 187· 5th Cir.· 1988-08-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity was proper because the plaintiff's speech addressed a matter of public concern and the right was clearly established, and there was a genuine dispute of material fact regarding the motive for his termi
• Jones v. Bd. OF Police Comm'rs
  844 F.2d 500· 8th Cir.· 1988-04-01 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a new trial, in its jury instructions, or in admitting evidence of the plaintiff's prior convictions for impeachment purposes.
• Williams v. Faulkner
  837 F.2d 304· 7th Cir.· 1988-01-12 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a district court's sua sponte dismissal of a pro se, in forma pauperis complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) requires a less stringent standard than a dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6), and that the Eighth Amendment claim against certain defendants was not frivolous
• Vinson v. Campbell Cnty. Fiscal Court
  820 F.2d 194· 6th Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the magistrate erred in dismissing the substantive due process claim regarding child custody, and that the claim regarding false imprisonment should be analyzed under Parratt v. Taylor, but reversed the summary judgment on the custody claim.
• BeVIER v. Hucal
  806 F.2d 123· 7th Cir.· 1986-11-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the arresting officer lacked probable cause to arrest the plaintiffs for child neglect because he failed to conduct a reasonable investigation into the circumstances, and therefore was not entitled to qualified immunity.
• Wilson v. The City OF N. Little Rock
  801 F.2d 316· 8th Cir.· 1986-09-12 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the § 1983 claim against individual officers based on Parratt v. Taylor, as intentional abuse of power implicates substantive due process. However, the court affirmed the directed verdict for the City, finding no unconsti
• Darryl H. v. Coler
  801 F.2d 893· 7th Cir.· 1986-09-09 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that while DCFS physical examinations of children implicate Fourth Amendment concerns, a warrant or probable cause is not constitutionally required in this context due to the state's compelling in
• Parrish v. Johnson
  800 F.2d 600· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-05 ·cited 34×·via Section 1983
  The court held that the district court erred in denying Giles' First and Eighth Amendment claims and in awarding only nominal damages to Parrish for his First Amendment violations. The court reversed the denial of Giles' claims and remanded for further proceedings on damages.
• Escamilla v. City OF Santa ANA
  796 F.2d 266· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-31 ·cited 34×
  The court held that police officers present at a bar shooting did not deprive a bystander of life without due process by failing to intervene, as no special relationship existed and the officers did not create the danger.
• Kraus v. Cnty. OF Pierce
  793 F.2d 1105· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-08 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the deputies' actions constituted an arrest without probable cause, but the subsequent entry into the house was consensual and did not violate any rights.
• Joseph v. Patterson
  795 F.2d 549· 6th Cir.· 1986-07-02 ·cited 34×
  Prosecutors are not absolutely immune for investigative or administrative acts, but are immune for actions directly related to initiating and presenting a criminal case. Investigators generally have qualified immunity.
• Forrester v. Judge Howard Lee White
  792 F.2d 647· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a state judge is not absolutely immune from civil liability for firing a probation officer in violation of the officer's constitutional rights, as this is an administrative rather than a judicial act.
• Brewer v. Muscle Shoals Bd. OF Educ.
  790 F.2d 1515· 11th Cir.· 1986-05-30 ·cited 34×
  The dissenting judge argued that the appellant's conviction for kidnapping should be affirmed because the victim's confinement in a bathroom, barricaded by bags, constituted a significant deprivation of liberty, meeting the statutory test for kidnapping, even if the victim escape
• Brown v. Trench
  787 F.2d 167· 3d Cir.· 1986-04-07 ·cited 34×
  A public employee's First Amendment rights are not violated if their position requires party allegiance for effective performance, but a property interest in employment requires pre-termination due process, not just post-termination remedies, unless the deprivation is random and
• Holloway v. Judge Dee Brown Walker
  784 F.2d 1287· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-19 ·cited 34×
  The court held that alleged conspiracy to deprive plaintiffs of property through judicial proceedings does not violate due process because adequate post-deprivation remedies (appeal) exist, and the right to a fair trial is procedural, not substantive.
• Williams v. Mensey
  785 F.2d 631· 8th Cir.· 1986-03-07 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to establish county liability under § 1983, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion regarding discovery, mistrial, evidence admission, or damage and fee awards.
• Edgardo A. Gonzalez, Jr. v. C.Y. Benavides, Jr.
  774 F.2d 1295· 5th Cir.· 1985-10-24 ·cited 34×
  A public employee's speech is protected under the First Amendment if it addresses a matter of public concern and does not unduly disrupt the government employer's operations, even if the employee holds a policymaking position.
• Neubauer v. City OF McALLEN
  766 F.2d 1567· 1st Cir.· 1985-08-08 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a general jury verdict based on multiple theories of liability, where at least one theory lacks sufficient evidentiary support, must be reversed because it is impossible to determine the jury's basis for the verdict. The court also held that a governmental emp
• Preferred Commc'ns, Inc. v. City OF LOS Angeles
  754 F.2d 1396· 9th Cir.· 1985-03-01 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a city cannot limit cable television access to a region to a single provider through an auction process, as this violates the First Amendment. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of the antitrust claims.
• Premachandra v. Mitts
  753 F.2d 635· 8th Cir.· 1985-01-14 ·cited 34×
  The dissenting judge argues the majority opinion misinterprets the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) by disregarding legislative history and rendering statutory language ineffective. The dissent believes the EAJA was intended to place the federal government on equal footing with
• Robbins v. Maggio
  750 F.2d 405· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-14 ·cited 34×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  The court held that orders denying appointment of counsel in civil cases are not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine.
• Sevier v. Turner
  742 F.2d 262· 6th Cir.· 1984-08-08 ·cited 34×
  The court held that federal abstention is not appropriate in this case, as the appellant alleged extraordinary circumstances involving federal constitutional violations.
• Lauritzen v. Secretary of the Navy
  736 F.2d 550· 9th Cir.· 1984-07-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the majority's interpretation of section 2412(b) undervalues legislative history and that Lauritzen is eligible for attorney's fees under that section.
• John v. Norris
  737 F.2d 1148· D.C. Cir.· 1984-06-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a prisoner alleging unprovoked macing and beating by correctional officers states a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, even without permanent injury, if the force was applied maliciously and sadistically.
• Winterland Concessions Co. v. Trela
  735 F.2d 257· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-17 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the denial of the motion to vacate the preliminary injunction and the dismissal of the civil rights counterclaim, but reversed the dismissal of the antitrust counterclaim.
• Hagee v. City OF Evanston
  729 F.2d 510· 7th Cir.· 1984-03-09 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the appellants' federal damages suit was barred by res judicata under Illinois law because the claims could have been raised in their prior state court action arising from the same set of facts.
• People Organized FOR Welfare AND Employment Rights (P.O.W.E.R.) v. Thompson
  727 F.2d 167· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-14 ·cited 34×
  An association lacks standing to sue under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a state's refusal to facilitate voter registration in public offices, as this does not constitute a direct and personal injury to the association or its members.
• Brown-Bey v. United States
  720 F.2d 467· 7th Cir.· 1983-11-01 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court's dismissal of the appellant's claims was proper, as the Privacy Act claim failed because only agencies, not individuals, can be sued, and the other claims lacked merit or were not cognizable federal claims.
• Strathie v. Dep't OF Transp.
  716 F.2d 227· 3d Cir.· 1983-09-08 ·cited 34×
  A handicapped individual is not 'otherwise qualified' if accommodation would require modification of the program's essential nature or impose an undue burden; the court must consider proposed accommodations.
• Bauer v. Norris
  713 F.2d 408· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-08 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict finding a civil rights violation due to excessive force, and the damages awarded were not excessive.
• Cleamtee Garner v. Memphis Police Dep't
  710 F.2d 240· 6th Cir.· 1983-06-16 ·cited 34×
  A state statute authorizing police to use deadly force to apprehend unarmed, non-violent fleeing felons is unconstitutional under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments as an unreasonable seizure and a violation of due process.
• Isaac v. Schwartz
  706 F.2d 15· 1st Cir.· 1983-04-26 ·cited 34×
  Res judicata bars the plaintiff's federal court action because the claims arose from the same transaction or series of transactions as the prior state court action.
• Moore v. State OF Fla. & Agents Ray Henderson
  703 F.2d 516· 11th Cir.· 1983-04-21 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a local rule requiring opposition to a summary judgment motion within 10 days does not constitute constructive notice for a pro se inmate, and that the inmate's First Amendment claim should have been considered as an amendment to the complaint.
• Palmer v. Hudson
  697 F.2d 1220· 4th Cir.· 1983-01-06 ·cited 34×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  The court held that intentional destruction of prisoner property is not a due process violation if an adequate state remedy exists, but a prisoner's claim of an unreasonable search motivated by harassment requires further factual determination.
• McKINNIS v. Lt. James Mosely
  693 F.2d 1054· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-13 ·cited 34×
  The court held that while the prisoner's claim was properly brought under § 1983, it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because it did not present an identifiable federal or constitutional issue.