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

• Kissinger v. Foti
  544 F.2d 1257· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and his arguments for tolling were insufficient.
• Getty v. Reed
  547 F.2d 971· 6th Cir.· 1977-01-05 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to hear the complaints, but that the due process claims in Collis' case were insubstantial. Getty's due process claims were also insubstantial, but his First Amendment claim required further consideration.
• Cruz v. Skelton
  543 F.2d 86· 5th Cir.· 1976-11-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a prisoner's mere expectation of parole is not a 'grievous loss' triggering constitutional due process protections, and the Equal Protection Clause does not require appointment of counsel for indigent parole applicants.
• United States v. Ill. Bell Tel. Co.
  531 F.2d 809· 7th Cir.· 1976-02-23 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a district court possesses inherent authority to compel a telephone company to provide assistance in installing a pen register, even if Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act does not apply.
• Bond v. Stanton
  528 F.2d 688· 7th Cir.· 1976-01-07 ·cited 24×
  The Eleventh Amendment does not bar the assessment of attorneys' fees against state officials sued in their official capacity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as the Supreme Court's summary affirmance in Sims v. Amos is binding precedent.
• Hanneman v. Breier
  528 F.2d 750· 7th Cir.· 1976-01-06 ·cited 24×
  Disciplinary action against police officers for disclosing a police investigation, after its existence was already public, violated their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
• Lecil Hander v. SAN Jacinto Junior Coll.
  522 F.2d 204· 5th Cir.· 1975-10-29 ·cited 24×
  Jurisdiction in this case is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and Texas junior college districts are not immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment.
• Muzquiz v. City OF SAN Antonio
  520 F.2d 993· 5th Cir.· 1975-10-08 ·cited 24×
  The Pension Fund Board of Trustees is not a 'person' amenable to suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but its individual members are. The no-refund provisions of the pension statute are constitutional.
• Fitzgerald v. Porter Mem'l Hosp.
  523 F.2d 716· 7th Cir.· 1975-09-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the asserted right of marital privacy does not extend to a father's presence in the delivery room of a public hospital that has a policy excluding him for medical reasons.
• Elliott H. Velger v. Cawley
  525 F.2d 334· 2d Cir.· 1975-09-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a stigma attached to the probationary police officer's dismissal, entitling him to a hearing to confront the allegations in his personnel file.
• Cook v. Bounds
  518 F.2d 779· 4th Cir.· 1975-06-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the prisoner's requests for appointed counsel and witnesses in his civil rights action.
• Bryan v. Werner
  516 F.2d 233· 3d Cir.· 1975-05-07 ·cited 24×
  Prison regulations restricting inmate law clinic assistance in suits against the institution and censoring outgoing mail may violate constitutional rights if they impede access to the courts without reasonable alternatives. The court affirmed the dismissal of some claims but reve
• Clark v. Ziedonis
  513 F.2d 79· 7th Cir.· 1975-03-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court's finding that the officer used excessive force was not clearly erroneous, affirming the judgment.
• Ailshire v. Darnell
  508 F.2d 526· 8th Cir.· 1974-12-31 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court erred by treating a motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment without providing notice or an opportunity for the plaintiff to respond.
• Stanford W. Ascherman, M.D. v. Presbyterian Hosp. OF Pac. Med. Ctr., Inc.
  507 F.2d 1103· 9th Cir.· 1974-12-10 ·cited 24×
  A private hospital's receipt of federal funds and tax exemption does not automatically render all its actions 'state action' subject to constitutional scrutiny.
• Goode v. Rizzo
  506 F.2d 542· 3d Cir.· 1974-11-01 ·cited 24×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim
  The court affirmed the injunctive relief granted by the district court but vacated and remanded the award of counsel fees for further proceedings due to lack of clear explanation.
• McLALLEN v. Henderson
  492 F.2d 1298· 8th Cir.· 1974-03-05 ·cited 24×
  Court reporters are not protected by judicial immunity for ministerial duties, but may have qualified immunity.
• Beauregard F. Birdwell v. Hazelwood Sch. Dist.
  491 F.2d 490· 8th Cir.· 1974-02-05 ·cited 24×·via Violation Of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
  A probationary teacher's disruptive conduct, including inciting students and suggesting violence, can justify termination, and the teacher waived due process claims by failing to attend a properly noticed hearing.
• Reed v. Hutto
  486 F.2d 534· 8th Cir.· 1973-10-23 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the inmate's civil rights action was barred by the applicable Arkansas three-year statute of limitations, affirming the district court's dismissal.
• Am. Radio Ass'n v. Mobile S.S. Ass'n, Inc.
  483 F.2d 1· 5th Cir.· 1973-08-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the unions' motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin state court proceedings.
• Marusa v. Dist. OF Columbia
  484 F.2d 828· D.C. Cir.· 1973-08-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the plaintiff stated common law causes of action against the District of Columbia, its police chief, and the bar owner, and that the claims were filed within the applicable statute of limitations.
• Petersen v. Talisman Sugar Corp.
  478 F.2d 73· 5th Cir.· 1973-05-03 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the company's labor camp, functioning as a company town, is subject to First Amendment restraints, requiring reasonable access for the public to communicate with workers, and that the plaintiffs have standing to assert their own rights to disseminate informati
• Braden v. The Univ. OF Pittsburgh & Wesley W. Posvar
  477 F.2d 1· 3d Cir.· 1973-04-11 ·cited 24×
• Remmers v. Lou V. Brewer
  475 F.2d 52· 8th Cir.· 1973-03-12 ·cited 24×
  A pro se civil rights complaint cannot be dismissed without issuing process and providing notice and an opportunity to respond, and an evidentiary hearing is required to determine if due process and First Amendment rights were violated.
• Wilson v. Webster
  467 F.2d 1282· 9th Cir.· 1972-10-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that while the refusal of injunctive relief was proper due to changed circumstances, the dismissal of the claim for cancellation of arrest records was premature and required a full hearing.
• Bracey v. Captain Herringa and Sergeant Gade
  466 F.2d 702· 7th Cir.· 1972-08-03 ·cited 24×
  The court held that prison records containing self-serving statements by defendants and other guards are not sufficiently reliable to support a motion for summary judgment in a civil rights action.
• LaFLEUR v. Cleveland Bd. OF Educ.
  465 F.2d 1184· 6th Cir.· 1972-07-27 ·cited 24×
  The regulation requiring maternity leave prior to delivery is a permissible exercise of the Board's discretion and does not violate the Equal Protection Clause. However, the post-delivery waiting period lacks a rational basis.
• Rozecki v. Gaughan
  459 F.2d 6· 1st Cir.· 1972-04-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the inadequacy of heating, even if unintentional, can constitute cruel and unusual punishment cognizable under the Civil Rights Act, and the defendants' good faith efforts do not excuse equitable relief.
• Breeden v. Hunter P. Jackson
  457 F.2d 578· 4th Cir.· 1972-03-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the prisoner's claims of deprivations in maximum security did not rise to constitutional dimensions and were therefore not actionable.
• Gautreaux v. Romney
  457 F.2d 124· 7th Cir.· 1972-03-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by enjoining all federal funds for the Model Cities Program to pressure unrelated entities, ignoring the program's innocent beneficiaries.
• Savage v. United States
  450 F.2d 449· 8th Cir.· 1971-11-04 ·cited 24×
  The court held that both the malicious prosecution and civil rights claims were barred by Minnesota's two-year statute of limitations.
• Bright v. Louie B. Nunn
  448 F.2d 245· 6th Cir.· 1971-09-24 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Governor and University President acted within their authority in imposing restrictions during campus disorders, and these actions did not violate students' First Amendment rights.
• United States ex rel. Edwin Gockley v. Myers
  450 F.2d 232· 3d Cir.· 1971-09-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that his arrest was illegal or that his statements were coerced, and therefore, he was not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief.
• Tredwell A. Harrison and M. Gale Harrison v. Brooks
  446 F.2d 404· 1st Cir.· 1971-07-27 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing Counts IX and X for lack of jurisdiction, finding sufficient allegations of purposeful discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) and related jurisdictional statutes.
• Fletcher v. Hook
  446 F.2d 14· 3d Cir.· 1971-05-17 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a state prisoner's malpractice claim against his appointed counsel is not cognizable under the Civil Rights Act, and a perjury claim was properly dismissed.
• Wilwording v. Swenson
  439 F.2d 1331· 8th Cir.· 1971-03-16 ·cited 24×
  Prisoners must exhaust all available state judicial remedies, including mandamus, prohibition, and injunction, before seeking equitable relief in federal court for conditions of confinement, even if those conditions might be cognizable under federal habeas corpus.
• Virvus Jones v. Snead
  431 F.2d 1115· 8th Cir.· 1970-10-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction for student reinstatement, as a complete record and final judgment are necessary for appellate review of due process claims.
• MacDONALD v. Musick
  425 F.2d 373· 9th Cir.· 1970-04-20 ·cited 24×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority's approach is unrealistic and would affirm the district court's judgment.
• Lindahl King v. Saddleback Junior Coll. Dist.
  425 F.2d 426· 9th Cir.· 1970-04-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in granting preliminary injunctions that went beyond preserving the status quo and decreed student registration in violation of school regulations prior to a determination of the regulation's validity.
• Hillman v. Knable
  391 F.2d 596· 3d Cir.· 1968-03-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Pennsylvania one-year statute of limitations for false arrest applies to actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when the facts alleged constitute false arrest, even if they also describe false imprisonment.
• Fanale v. Hon. J. Webb Sheehy
  385 F.2d 866· 2d Cir.· 1967-11-09 ·cited 24×
• Mayhue v. City OF Plantation
  375 F.2d 447· 5th Cir.· 1967-03-30 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the city ordinance created an arbitrary classification violating the Equal Protection Clause and that municipalities are not liable for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Gaito v. Strauss
  368 F.2d 787· 3d Cir.· 1966-11-08 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the civil rights action, finding the damages claim barred by the statute of limitations and equitable relief unavailable.
• Marland v. Heyse
  315 F.2d 312· 10th Cir.· 1963-03-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that arrests made without probable cause, under the circumstances described, could constitute a deprivation of constitutional rights actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, creating a jury question.
• Byrd v. Sexton
  277 F.2d 418· 8th Cir.· 1960-03-28 ·cited 24×
  The court held that 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 and § 1985 do not provide relief for the plaintiff's alleged injuries, as the statutes were intended to protect against state action and not individual invasions of rights, and have been narrowly interpreted.
• Garcia v. Cristobal Reyes & The City of Fort Lauderdale
  697 So. 2d 549· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-07-09 ·cited 23×
  Garcia appealed the dismissal of his complaint seeking damages for thirty months of wrongful imprisonment resulting from police misconduct in a reverse-sting operation. The court affirmed, holding that Florida law does not recognize a cause of action for money damages against the
• Est. OF Joseph D. Farrar & Dale Lawson Farrar v. Cain
  941 F.2d 1311· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-17 ·cited 23×
• Luckey v. Zell Miller
  929 F.2d 618· 11th Cir.· 1991-04-23 ·cited 23×
  The law of the case doctrine does not preclude the district court from considering the abstention doctrine when the issue was not explicitly decided or implicitly resolved in prior appellate proceedings.
• Trujillo v. Grand Junction Reg'l Ctr. & William Jackson
  928 F.2d 973· 10th Cir.· 1991-03-25 ·cited 23×
  The court held that 42 U.S.C. § 1981 does not provide a remedy for discriminatory discharge claims, and that the plaintiff failed to prove disparate treatment under Title VII.
• Viviana McCALDEN v. Cal. Library Ass'n
  955 F.2d 1214· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-20 ·cited 23×
  The Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of the breach of contract, tortious interference with contract, and Unruh Act claims, finding that the district court erred in its application of pleading rules and California law. The court affirmed the dismissal of the § 1985 and § 1986