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

• Harrison J. Cheramie, Jr. v. Honorable Ben N. Tucker
  493 F.2d 586· 5th Cir.· 1974-05-02 ·cited 33×
  State agencies and judges are immune from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for actions taken in their official capacities, and prior litigation bars relitigation of the underlying negligence claim.
• Lansdale v. Tyler Junior Coll. & Harry E. Jenkins
  470 F.2d 659· 5th Cir.· 1972-10-04 ·cited 33×
• Lindahl King v. Saddleback Junior Coll. Dist.
  445 F.2d 932· 9th Cir.· 1971-06-25 ·cited 33×
  School dress code regulations on male students' hair length do not unconstitutionally infringe upon students' rights when enacted for the educational process and applied even-handedly.
• de Vita v. Sills
  422 F.2d 1172· 3d Cir.· 1970-03-09 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to enjoin state proceedings and that abstention was inappropriate, but the plaintiff's claims regarding self-incrimination, prejudicial publicity, and denial of effective counsel were not grounds for i
• Nelson v. Keyvon Sellers
  89 F.4th 1289· 11th Cir.· 2024-01-05 ·cited 32×
  A jail intake officer violated a pretrial detainee's clearly established Fourteenth Amendment right to protection from violence when he failed to warn classification officers about an inmate's newly arrived cellmate who had just stabbed a stranger solely because of the stranger's
• Akeem Washington v. Rivera
  939 F.3d 1239· 11th Cir.· 2019-09-25 ·cited 32×
  Rivera is not entitled to quasi-judicial immunity, but she is entitled to qualified immunity because her actions did not violate clearly established Fourth Amendment rights.
• Long v. Sec'y, Dep't OF Corr., Warden, Fla. State Prison, John Does, as designee of Barry Reddish, and/or Mark S. Inch
  924 F.3d 1171· 11th Cir.· 2019-05-22 ·cited 32×
• Jenne v. Maranto
  825 So. 2d 409· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-05-08 ·cited 32×
  A Sheriff of Broward County appealed the trial court's denial of his Eleventh Amendment immunity claim in an Equal Pay Act lawsuit brought by a female employee. The court held that the Sheriff, as a county official, is not an arm of the State entitled to Eleventh Amendment protec
• D.R. v. Middle Bucks Area Vocational Tech. Sch.
  972 F.2d 1364· 3d Cir.· 1992-08-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that compulsory school attendance, the minority status of students, and the pervasive control schools exercise over students create a special relationship that imposes a constitutional duty on schools to protect students' liberty interests while in their functional
• Jacobs v. City OF Lawrence
  927 F.2d 1111· 10th Cir.· 1991-03-05 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the appellants failed to state a claim for procedural due process, equal protection, or substantive due process, and that the city was immune from antitrust liability under the state action doctrine.
• Auriemma v. Rice
  910 F.2d 1449· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-20 ·cited 32×
  The dissenting judges would reverse the district court's denial of summary judgment on the race discrimination and retaliation claims, arguing that qualified immunity should apply and the retaliation claim does not involve a matter of public concern.
• Yeksigian v. Nappi
  900 F.2d 101· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-16 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the complaint sufficiently alleged actions taken under color of state law and that a single decision by a final policymaker could establish municipal liability under § 1983.
• Professor Ernest F. Dube v. The State Univ. OF NEW York
  900 F.2d 587· 2d Cir.· 1990-04-12 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the district court did address the qualified immunity defense, establishing appellate jurisdiction.
• Kennedy v. LOS Angeles Police Dep't
  887 F.2d 920· 9th Cir.· 1989-10-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the officers lacked probable cause to arrest Kennedy for grand theft and were not entitled to qualified immunity, and that the LAPD's policy of conducting body-cavity searches on all felony arrestees violates the Fourth Amendment.
• Gutierrez-Rodriguez v. Desiderio Cartagena and Domingo Alvarez
  882 F.2d 553· 1st Cir.· 1989-08-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings of liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against both the individual officers who fired shots and their supervisors, based on reckless or callous indifference to the plaintiff's constitutional rights.
• Valdez v. City & Cnty. OF Denver
  878 F.2d 1285· 10th Cir.· 1989-07-06 ·cited 32×
  An official charged with executing a facially valid court order is absolutely immune from liability for damages for actions taken pursuant to that order.
• Pugh v. Parish OF ST. Tammany
  875 F.2d 436· 5th Cir.· 1989-05-31 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a complaint filed in forma pauperis is not automatically frivolous for failing to state a claim, but this complaint was still properly dismissed as frivolous due to prosecutorial immunity and lack of arguable basis in law or fact.
• Wilkins v. MAY
  872 F.2d 190· 7th Cir.· 1989-04-07 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a claim for severe mental distress inflicted during custodial interrogation, even if not rising to the level of a Fourth Amendment violation, can be actionable under the Due Process Clause.
• Cordero v. De Jesus-Mendez
  867 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1989-01-24 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the district court erred in awarding back pay post-verdict and in nullifying the jury's answer regarding official policy, necessitating a new trial on damages but not liability. It also affirmed that certain positions, like Municipal Secretary and Personnel Di
• Specht v. Jensen
  853 F.2d 805· 10th Cir.· 1988-08-03 ·cited 32×
  An attorney, called as an expert witness, cannot state his views of the law governing the verdict or opine whether a defendant's conduct violated that law, as such testimony is beyond the scope of Fed.R.Evid. 702 and usurps the court's function.
• Perez v. Ortiz
  849 F.2d 793· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-27 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by sua sponte dismissing pendent state law claims and official capacity claims without notice or an opportunity to be heard, and without proper Rule 54(b) certification.
• Goddard v. Urrea
  847 F.2d 765· 11th Cir.· 1988-06-20 ·cited 32×
  The denial of qualified immunity is immediately appealable if it turns on an issue of law, even if factual disputes remain, because qualified immunity provides an immunity from suit.
• Hand v. Gary
  838 F.2d 1420· 5th Cir.· 1988-03-10 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant's actions were the legal cause of any constitutional deprivation, despite the jury finding liability for malicious prosecution and false arrest.
• McCARTHY v. Mayo
  827 F.2d 1310· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-14 ·cited 32×
  The district court abused its discretion by reaching the merits of thirteen pendent state claims that were neither briefed nor argued by the parties.
• McDONALD v. Hillsborough Cnty. Sch. Bd.
  821 F.2d 1563· 11th Cir.· 1987-07-21 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the plaintiff's federal lawsuit was barred by res judicata because the claims and parties were identical or in privity with those previously litigated in Florida state court.
• Serio v. Members OF La. State Bd. OF Pardons
  821 F.2d 1112· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-17 ·cited 32×
  Members of the Louisiana State Board of Pardons are absolutely immune from § 1983 damages claims. Claims for injunctive relief that are essentially attacks on a single parole hearing require exhaustion of state habeas corpus remedies.
• Poole v. Lambert
  819 F.2d 1025· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-19 ·cited 32×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  The court held that dismissing a prisoner's case for failure to prosecute was an unduly severe sanction when the district court failed to rule on the motion for appointment of counsel and did not consider all relevant factors before denying a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandu
• Cabell v. Petty
  810 F.2d 463· 4th Cir.· 1987-02-05 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' attorney did not violate Rule 11 by filing the complaint.
• Barr v. Abrams
  810 F.2d 358· 2d Cir.· 1987-01-28 ·cited 32×
  Prosecutors are absolutely immune from civil rights liability for actions intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process, unless they proceed in the clear absence of all jurisdiction; otherwise, qualified immunity applies. Investigators are protected by qua
• Schwartz v. Fla. Bd. OF Regents
  807 F.2d 901· 11th Cir.· 1987-01-13 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the district court erred in its application of a revised statistical formula to determine pay disparity and that the settlement agreement did not waive future claims of discrimination.
• Alean Lewis v. Coughlin
  801 F.2d 570· 2d Cir.· 1986-09-10 ·cited 32×
  The court held that while the risk of nonpayment in a civil rights case may justify an upward adjustment to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, the district court must make specific findings regarding the fee arrangement and the actual likelihood of success at the outset. The
• Solomon Lusby v. T.G. & Y. Stores, Inc.
  796 F.2d 1307· 10th Cir.· 1986-07-16 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the city's failure to object to an improper jury instruction at trial waived the right to raise the error on appeal, even after remand for reconsideration in light of a Supreme Court decision.
• Hinshaw v. Doffer
  785 F.2d 1260· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-28 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support a judgment against the police chief for failure to supervise or train the officer, but sufficient to support judgments against the officer for false arrest and excessive force. The court also held that the officer is fu
• Malachowski v. City OF Keene
  787 F.2d 704· 1st Cir.· 1986-03-28 ·cited 32×
  The court held that federal courts should abstain from hearing claims for injunctive relief related to pending state juvenile delinquency proceedings and that various appellees were immune from damages claims or failed to state a claim under § 1983.
• Thorne v. Major "A.B." Jones
  765 F.2d 1270· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 32×
  The court held that convicted prisoners do not have a First Amendment right to physical association with visitors, and strip searches of visitors require reasonable suspicion, which was lacking in Mr. Thorne's case. However, the law regarding reasonable suspicion for such searche
• Bridges v. Russell
  757 F.2d 1155· 11th Cir.· 1985-04-15 ·cited 32×
  A prisoner's claim of transfer in retaliation for First Amendment activity can proceed, even if state law does not create a liberty interest in remaining at a particular facility.
• Holley v. The Seminole Cnty. Sch. Dist.
  755 F.2d 1492· 11th Cir.· 1985-03-25 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the school board's hearing procedures did not violate due process, but the First Amendment retaliation claim raised genuine issues of material fact requiring a trial.
• Wheeler v. Mental Health & Mental Retardation Auth. OF Harris Cnty.
  752 F.2d 1063· 5th Cir.· 1985-02-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the plaintiff was denied constitutional procedural due process when she was not given prior written notice of dismissal reasons and an opportunity to respond, but that she did not establish a violation of MHMRA's internal procedures. The court also vacated the
• McGUINNESS v. United States Postal Serv.
  744 F.2d 1318· 7th Cir.· 1984-10-05 ·cited 32×
  A federal job applicant alleging handicap discrimination must exhaust administrative remedies under Title VII before filing suit, and must name the agency head as the defendant.
• Milan Schultz v. Baumgart
  738 F.2d 231· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-02 ·cited 32×
  A public employee with a property interest in their job must receive prior notice and a meaningful opportunity to respond before termination; post-termination remedies do not cure a pre-termination due process violation if pre-termination procedures were practicable. Individual l
• Bella Oberlander and Sandor Oberlander v. Perales
  740 F.2d 116· 2d Cir.· 1984-06-29 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a state Medicaid provider's claim that state officials violated federal law by failing to comply with state regulations is not actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and that available state procedures provided sufficient due process for recoupment of overpayments
• Thomas v. Eristus Sams
  734 F.2d 185· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-29 ·cited 32×
  The court held that while the mayor/magistrate was immune for judicial acts, his prior non-judicial acts of investigation and complaint issuance, done with malice, were not shielded by judicial immunity. The city was liable because the mayor's actions represented official city po
• Brandon v. Dist. of Columbia Bd. of Parole
  734 F.2d 56· D.C. Cir.· 1984-05-08 ·cited 32×
  A pro se complaint filed in forma pauperis should not be dismissed sua sponte unless it is frivolous or malicious; a complaint with an arguable basis in law and fact is not frivolous.
• McGRATH v. Carlo Spirito, Jr.
  733 F.2d 967· 1st Cir.· 1984-05-02 ·cited 32×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that the defendant waived his objections to jury instructions by failing to properly object after the charge, and that the given instruction was not plain error.
• O'Bryan v. McKASKLE
  729 F.2d 991· 5th Cir.· 1984-03-29 ·cited 32×
  The court denied the applications for a stay of execution and a certificate of probable cause, finding the movant failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right.
• Keylik v. Goldstein
  724 F.2d 844· 1st Cir.· 1984-01-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that an attorney's prior consultation with a potential witness, even if brief and followed by withdrawal, can create a conflict of interest warranting disqualification if the matters are substantially related to the current litigation, and that opposing counsel has
• Abdul Shah v. T.D. Hutto
  722 F.2d 1167· 4th Cir.· 1983-12-08 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the 1979 amendment to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a) requires a motion for an extension of time to be filed within 30 days of the original deadline, and a bare notice of appeal is insufficient.
• Loya v. Desert Sands Unified Sch. Dist.
  721 F.2d 279· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-02 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a complaint arriving within the statutory period but failing to conform to local rules should be considered filed for statute of limitations purposes, and that the determination of whether a public employee's speech is protected by the First Amendment is a que
• Brandon v. Allen
  719 F.2d 151· 6th Cir.· 1983-10-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that Director Chapman is entitled to qualified immunity and reversed the finding of liability against him, but remanded the case to recalculate damages against Officer Allen to include dignitary harm.
• Boatowners & Tenants Ass'n, Inc. v. Port OF Seattle
  716 F.2d 669· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-22 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the River and Harbor Improvements Act does not create enforceable federal rights for pleasure craft owners, thus precluding a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.