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

• Barron Collier v. City OF Springdale
  733 F.2d 1311· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the availability of adequate state law mechanisms for compensation precludes a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a taking of property for public use.
• Adams v. Gunnell
  729 F.2d 362· 5th Cir.· 1984-04-13 ·cited 12×
  Discipline imposed for signing a prison petition did not violate the First Amendment, but the lack of clear notice that such conduct was prohibited violated due process. The issue of qualified immunity was not properly preserved and requires further determination.
• Rollins v. Farmer
  731 F.2d 533· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the suit against Officer Farmer in his individual capacity, as his good faith was placed in contention at the pretrial conference.
• Earnest Edmond Abbitt v. Franklin
  731 F.2d 661· 10th Cir.· 1984-03-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the new rule established in Garcia v. Wilson, which dictates the method for selecting an analogous state statute of limitations for § 1983 claims, should not be retroactively applied to bar the plaintiff's claim due to substantial inequity.
• Boileau v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.
  730 F.2d 929· 3d Cir.· 1984-03-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the state court's denial of a petition to strike a judgment, limited to the face of the record, did not preclude a federal diversity action on the merits, and that the district court abused its discretion in denying a motion to amend the complaint based solely
• Lucinda Cunningham v. Barrett Toan
  728 F.2d 1101· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-01 ·cited 12×
  A state practice of automatically deeming Old Age, Survivor and Disability Insurance (OASDI) benefits, paid to a representative payee for a minor parent, as income available to that parent's dependent child for AFDC eligibility is invalid because it conflicts with federal regulat
• Arney v. Dep't OF Natural Res.
  448 So. 2d 1041· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-12-29 ·cited 12×
  Lawrence Arney appealed a summary judgment dismissing his false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution claims against Department of Natural Resources officials following his arrest for failing to report an oil spill. The First District Court of Appeal reversed in p
• Rinker v. Cnty. OF Napa
  724 F.2d 1352· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a party's unauthorized communication with a juror creates a rebuttable presumption of prejudice that was not adequately rebutted in this case.
• Lawyer v. Jefferson D. Kernodle & Upsher Labs., Inc.
  721 F.2d 632· 8th Cir.· 1983-11-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the pathologist and laboratory owed no duty to the plaintiff for the negligent diagnosis of the cause of death, and that the pathologist was entitled to qualified immunity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Burgess v. City OF Houston
  718 F.2d 151· 5th Cir.· 1983-10-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the city's procedure of requiring private electricians to inspect wiring before city inspection is not an improper delegation and that the appellant has no constitutional right to electricity without complying with reasonable administrative procedures.
• J.D. Franks and Margaret Franks v. Van Smith
  717 F.2d 183· 5th Cir.· 1983-10-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while federal courts lack jurisdiction over domestic relations disputes, a Fourth Amendment claim arising from a child custody situation can be heard if not frivolous.
• Charles W. Keney, M.D. v. R.C. Derbyshire, M.D.
  718 F.2d 352· 10th Cir.· 1983-10-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the procedures afforded under the Uniform Licensing Act, including notice and a hearing, were sufficient to satisfy due process, and a separate probable cause hearing was not constitutionally required in this license revocation context.
• Lotz Realty Co., Inc. v. United States Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  717 F.2d 929· 4th Cir.· 1983-09-19 ·cited 12×
  The League was the prevailing party entitled to a hearing on its motion for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Duke v. Fob James
  713 F.2d 1506· 11th Cir.· 1983-09-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Pullman abstention was improper because the state statute was not "fairly subject to a state law construction that would avoid or substantially modify the federal constitutional question." The court also noted that dismissal was inappropriate if abstention wer
• Harris v. Young
  718 F.2d 620· 4th Cir.· 1983-08-16 ·cited 12×
• Fast v. The Sch. Dist. OF City OF Ladue
  712 F.2d 379· 8th Cir.· 1983-07-28 ·cited 12×
  A plaintiff is not a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 if they do not succeed on any significant issue which achieves some of the benefit sought.
• Laurenzo v. Miss. High Sch. Activities Ass'n, Inc.
  708 F.2d 1038· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-08 ·cited 12×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  A party is not considered a prevailing party under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 solely because they obtained an injunction pending appeal based on a substantial case and balance of equities, without a determination of the merits.
• Holman v. Hilton
  712 F.2d 854· 3d Cir.· 1983-07-06 ·cited 12×
  A state statute barring prisoners from filing tort claims until release from confinement violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment if no adequate alternative administrative remedies exist.
• Turman v. Tuttle
  711 F.2d 148· 10th Cir.· 1983-06-28 ·cited 12×
  A pro se litigant who prevails in a § 1983 action is not entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Fontana v. Barham
  707 F.2d 221· 5th Cir.· 1983-06-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because the defendant's actions did not constitute a deprivation of a constitutionally protected property interest.
• Freeman v. Hittle
  708 F.2d 442· 9th Cir.· 1983-06-13 ·cited 12×
  Prosecuting attorneys and their investigators are absolutely immune from civil suit for actions taken within the scope of their official duties, including investigative functions related to criminal prosecutions.
• Crow v. Gullet
  706 F.2d 856· 8th Cir.· 1983-05-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the state's development and regulation of Bear Butte State Park did not violate the plaintiffs' First Amendment religious free exercise rights or other statutory/treaty rights.
• Inmates OF the Lincoln Intake AND Detention Facility By Dennis Windes v. Boosalis
  705 F.2d 1021· 8th Cir.· 1983-05-03 ·cited 12×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Action
  The court held that the case was moot because the named plaintiffs' claims became moot before the district court ruled on class certification, and the claims did not fit the 'capable of repetition, yet evading review' exception.
• Segarra v. M.J. McDADE
  706 F.2d 1301· 4th Cir.· 1983-04-26 ·cited 12×
  A prison official's systematic and arbitrary prohibition of an inmate's right to call live witnesses in disciplinary hearings violates due process, even if the official has discretion to deny witnesses in specific cases.
• Jones v. O.D. Gann
  703 F.2d 513· 11th Cir.· 1983-04-18 ·cited 12×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  The court held that res judicata barred claims against the city and mayor, but not against individual defendants Gann, Griffin, and Crane, as their involvement was not shown to have been adjudicated in prior proceedings.
• Derrickson v. Bd. OF Educ. OF the City OF ST. Louis
  703 F.2d 309· 8th Cir.· 1983-03-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiff did not possess a property interest in continued employment under Missouri law or Board regulations, thus his due process claim failed. However, the court reversed the judgment on his free speech claim, finding the district court's findings insuf
• TUG Valley Recovery Ctr. v. Watt
  703 F.2d 796· 4th Cir.· 1983-03-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the challenge to the Secretary's approval of the state program constituted an attack on federal regulation 30 C.F.R. § 705.5, which must be brought in the District
• CLR Corp. v. Lowell Henline
  702 F.2d 637· 6th Cir.· 1983-03-23 ·cited 12×
• Mitchell v. Marlin W. Johnston
  701 F.2d 337· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Texas's reduced EPSDT program failed to provide adequate dental care and affirmed the district court's finding of non-compliance, but reversed and remanded regarding attorney's fees.
• Phelps v. Sgt. Anderson and Officer Langford
  700 F.2d 147· 4th Cir.· 1983-02-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a prisoner's temporary loss of property due to negligent ministerial acts by prison officials does not violate due process if an adequate postdeprivation remedy exists.
• Montgomery v. Boshears
  698 F.2d 739· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-22 ·cited 12×
  A non-tenured university employee has no property interest in continued employment and cannot claim a liberty interest or First Amendment retaliation if the university shows independent, compelling reasons for non-renewal.
• Glick v. Sargent
  696 F.2d 413· 8th Cir.· 1983-01-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the inmate's pro se complaint failed to state a cause of action against the prison officers and warden, and that courts generally do not review prison disciplinary factual findings.
• Rivera v. Marcus
  696 F.2d 1016· 2d Cir.· 1982-12-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the state must ensure children's best interests are the foremost consideration when removing them from parental care, and parents must have a fair opportunity to participate in hearings concerning custody.
• Fulford v. King
  692 F.2d 11· 5th Cir.· 1982-11-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that requiring prisoners in an extended lockdown unit to wear full restraints and a 'black box' during transport outside the prison does not violate the Eighth or Fourteenth Amendments.
• Remola Boykin v. The Dist. of Columbia
  689 F.2d 1092· D.C. Cir.· 1982-09-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that municipalities cannot be held liable under a respondeat superior theory for constitutional torts committed by their employees in Bivens-type actions, and that claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986 are not applicable to the District of Columbia in this
• Tikalsky v. City OF Chicago
  687 F.2d 175· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-02 ·cited 12×·via Section 1983
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by granting a new trial based on the reversal of a case that had minimal impact on the jury's deliberations and was not a basis for the jury's verdict.
• Hogan v. Midland Cnty. Comm'rs Court & Dallas Smith
  680 F.2d 1101· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a prisoner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis without sufficient justification, as the prisoner's claims were not demonstrably frivolous or malicious.
• Sotomura v. Cnty. OF Haw.
  679 F.2d 152· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-07 ·cited 12×
  A party who prevails by obtaining dismissal of an appeal as untimely is considered a prevailing party entitled to attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Horton v. Goose Creek Indep. Sch. Dist.
  677 F.2d 471· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the sniffing of students by drug-detecting dogs is an unconstitutional search under the Fourth Amendment, but the sniffing of cars and lockers is permissible under the special circumstances of the school environment when conducted with reasonable suspicion.
• Truly v. Madison Gen. Hosp.
  673 F.2d 763· 5th Cir.· 1982-04-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the hospital's denial of staff privileges was not a violation of procedural due process or the First Amendment, and the findings of fact were not clearly erroneous.
• Stewart v. Hannon
  675 F.2d 846· 7th Cir.· 1982-04-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that plaintiffs were not prevailing parties entitled to attorneys' fees because the district court's finding that the lawsuit was not the catalyst for the defendants' decision to abandon the test results was not clearly erroneous.
• Parviz Modaber, M.D. v. Culpeper Mem'l Hosp., Inc.
  674 F.2d 1023· 4th Cir.· 1982-03-24 ·cited 12×·via 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action
  A private hospital's revocation of a physician's clinical staff privileges is not "state action" under the Fourteenth Amendment, even if the hospital receives federal funding, treats Medicare/Medicaid patients, or reports revocations to state authorities.
• Heille v. The City OF ST. Paul
  671 F.2d 1134· 8th Cir.· 1982-02-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish the requisite nexus with interstate commerce for his antitrust claims and that his § 1983 claims were also properly dismissed.
• Black v. Bayer
  672 F.2d 309· 3d Cir.· 1982-02-08 ·cited 12×
  Public defenders, their investigators, and court-appointed private attorneys do not act under color of state law for § 1983 claims, and are absolutely immune from civil liability for their traditional functions.
• Bradley v. Coughlin
  671 F.2d 686· 2d Cir.· 1982-01-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the prisoner's pro se complaint adequately stated claims for damages and that his first notice of appeal was timely and sufficient to confer appellate jurisdiction.
• Kirksey v. City OF Jackson
  663 F.2d 659· 5th Cir.· 1981-12-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the at-large voting system in Jackson, Mississippi, does not violate the Constitution or the Voting Rights Act because there was no proof of discriminatory intent in its establishment or maintenance, and judicial inquiry into individual voter motives is imperm
• Wolfel v. Sanborn
  666 F.2d 1005· 6th Cir.· 1981-11-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that parole officers are entitled to qualified immunity and should not be held personally liable for damages for obeying a policy adopted by the Authority and approved by the Attorney General, especially when they lacked authority to conduct on-site hearings.
• Sambo's Rests., Inc. v. The City OF ANN Arbor
  663 F.2d 686· 6th Cir.· 1981-11-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a contract obtained through economic coercion or duress, specifically threatening to withhold a building permit to force a company to waive its First Amendment right to use a name, is not binding.
• Rev. Vincent LaROCCA, esq. v. Gold
  662 F.2d 144· 2d Cir.· 1981-10-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiff was barred by collateral estoppel from relitigating his First Amendment claim in federal court, as the issue had been fully and fairly litigated in state courts.
• Douglas W. Wohlfahrt, M.D. v. Mem'l Med. Ctr.
  658 F.2d 416· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-08 ·cited 12×
  The denial of a preliminary injunction is affirmed, but the dismissal of the action is vacated and remanded because the district court improperly considered the merits without sufficient notice to the plaintiff.