Action 'Under Color Of State Law'

150 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Adolph G. Hoffman v. Halden
  268 F.2d 280· 9th Cir.· 1959-05-28 ·cited 184×
  The court held that the second amended complaint sufficiently stated a cause of action under the Civil Rights Act, and that the district court had jurisdiction. The court also addressed the elements of conspiracy claims under various Civil Rights statutes and the role of overt ac
• Bonner v. Coughlin
  545 F.2d 565· 7th Cir.· 1976-10-28 ·cited 125×
  The court held that the negligence of prison guards causing the loss of a prisoner's transcript was not a state deprivation of property without due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment, nor was it action 'under color of state law' for purposes of Section 1983.
• White v. Rochford
  592 F.2d 381· 7th Cir.· 1979-02-13 ·cited 88×
  Police officers may not constitutionally abandon children in health-endangering situations after arresting their custodian, as such conduct violates the Due Process Clause.
• Bottone v. Lindsley
  170 F.2d 705· 10th Cir.· 1948-11-05 ·cited 86×
  The court held that state court proceedings, which were not a complete nullity and were affirmed on appeal, do not constitute a deprivation of property without due process or equal protection cognizable under the Civil Rights Act.
• Wagenmann v. Adams
  829 F.2d 196· 1st Cir.· 1987-09-09 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the arrest and imprisonment of the plaintiff were without probable cause, and that the jury's verdicts on false arrest and false imprisonment were supported by the evidence.
• Schatte v. Int'l Alliance of Theatrical Stage Emps. & Moving Picture Mach. Operators of United States & Canada
  182 F.2d 158· 9th Cir.· 1950-05-01 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the complaint failed to state a claim for relief under the cited federal statutes, and that a prior decision involving the same parties and similar claims was decisive. The court also found that Section 301 of the Taft-Hartley Act was inapplicable due to the b
• Linda (Sinklear) Lessman v. McCORMICK
  591 F.2d 605· 10th Cir.· 1979-01-26 ·cited 69×
  The court held that the complaint sufficiently stated a claim for false arrest and imprisonment under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the arresting officer and bank employee, but not for claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 and 1986 due to lack of class-based discriminatory animus.
• Lowell Buller v. Buechler
  706 F.2d 844· 8th Cir.· 1983-05-05 ·cited 66×
  The court held that private individuals who utilize state garnishment procedures, even if later found unconstitutional, can be considered state actors for section 1983 purposes if they act jointly with state officials, and may assert a qualified immunity defense.
• Inez Martin v. Heckler
  773 F.2d 1145· 11th Cir.· 1985-10-15 ·cited 61×
  The federal government is liable for attorney fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(b) when acting under color of federal law, to the same extent as a state would be liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 for similar violations.
• Barnes v. Dorsey
  480 F.2d 1057· 8th Cir.· 1973-06-15 ·cited 58×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the plaintiff's civil rights claims against all defendants, finding no actionable deprivation of federally protected rights.
• Howerton v. Jess Gabica and Marjorie Gabica
  708 F.2d 380· 9th Cir.· 1983-05-10 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the landlords' actions, facilitated by repeated and active police involvement in the eviction process, constituted action taken under color of state law for purposes of a section 1983 claim.
• Folsom Inv. Co., Inc. v. Maxie R. Moore
  681 F.2d 1032· 5th Cir.· 1982-08-06 ·cited 50×
  A private party invoking a presumptively valid state attachment statute is entitled to good faith immunity from monetary liability under § 1983, and res judicata does not bar a claim if the constitutional validity of the attachment was not litigated in state court.
• McSHANE v. Moldovan
  172 F.2d 1016· 6th Cir.· 1949-02-08 ·cited 50×
  A complaint alleging state officers and others conspired to deprive a person of constitutional rights under color of state law, resulting in unlawful arrest, imprisonment, and a fraudulent trial, states a cause of action for damages under the Civil Rights Statutes.
• Kermit Constr. Corp. v. Banco Credito Y Ahorro Ponceno
  547 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1976-12-29 ·cited 46×
  A receiver acting under court orders shares the appointing judge's absolute immunity from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but a bank and corporation accused of conspiring with the receiver do not. Claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 and § 1981 were properly dismissed.
• DOE v. Bellin Mem'l Hosp.
  479 F.2d 756· 7th Cir.· 1973-06-01 ·cited 44×
  A private hospital's refusal to perform abortions, even if it receives federal or state funding and is state-regulated, does not violate 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless the state directly influences or participates in the decision.
• Walker v. Bank OF Am. Nat'l Tr. & Sav. Ass'n
  268 F.2d 16· 9th Cir.· 1959-05-22 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the action for lack of jurisdiction, and that the denial of the motion to alter the dismissal order was not an abuse of discretion because the proposed amended complaint was barred by the statute of limitations.
• Duriso v. K-Mart NO. 4195
  559 F.2d 1274· 5th Cir.· 1977-09-28 ·cited 40×
  The court held that sufficient evidence existed to support the jury's finding that the defendants acted under color of state law for a § 1983 claim, and affirmed the judgment.
• Palmer v. Columbia GAS OF Ohio, Inc.
  479 F.2d 153· 6th Cir.· 1973-05-22 ·cited 40×
  A privately owned public utility's termination of essential services, when authorized and regulated by the state, constitutes state action and must comply with due process requirements.
• Sparkman v. McFARLIN
  601 F.2d 261· 7th Cir.· 1979-05-02 ·cited 39×
  The court held that a private person can be liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for conspiring with an immune state judge, provided the conspiracy is alleged with particularity. The opinion emphasizes that conclusory allegations are insufficient and require factual support demonstratin
• Herrmann v. Moore
  576 F.2d 453· 2d Cir.· 1978-05-10 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the defendants acted under color of state law to deprive him of constitutional rights, or that they conspired with the requisite discriminatory animus for § 1985 claims.
• Hansen v. Ahlgrimm
  520 F.2d 768· 7th Cir.· 1975-07-08 ·cited 38×
  The court held that a private attorney prosecuting an order to show cause in state court is not acting under color of state law for purposes of a § 1983 claim, and declaratory relief against a judge requires a live case or controversy.
• Scott v. Eversole Mortuary
  522 F.2d 1110· 9th Cir.· 1975-07-08 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, finding that the allegations, if true, sufficiently pleaded state action.
• Harkins v. Gary Eldredge & the Mo. Bar Ass'n
  505 F.2d 802· 8th Cir.· 1974-11-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that an attorney's conduct in representing a client does not constitute action under color of state law for purposes of a § 1983 claim, and the Bar Association's lack of independent power to investigate or discipline attorneys meant claims against it were frivolous
• 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.
• Reverend W. Eugene Scott v. Rosenberg
  702 F.2d 1263· 9th Cir.· 1983-01-21 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the plaintiff had standing to bring the action and that summary judgment was appropriate because there was no genuine issue of material fact regarding the alleged violations of his First Amendment rights or claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1985(3).
• Watkins v. Oaklawn Jockey Club
  183 F.2d 440· 8th Cir.· 1950-07-19 ·cited 32×
  The court held that there was no substantial evidence that the sheriff and deputy were acting under color of state law when they ejected the plaintiff from the race track, thus their actions were not a deprivation of rights secured by the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Koch v. Zuieback
  316 F.2d 1· 9th Cir.· 1963-03-21 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, as the alleged actions did not fall under the Fifth Amendment, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1985(3), or the Universal Military Training and Service Act.
• Saxner v. Benson
  727 F.2d 669· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-13 ·cited 30×
  Prison disciplinary committee members are not entitled to absolute immunity, as their functions and procedures do not meet the standards required for such immunity, and public policy does not necessitate it.
• Cleveland Kimbrough v. Dave O'Neil [O'Neal]
  545 F.2d 1059· 7th Cir.· 1976-10-29 ·cited 30×
  A section 1983 action should be permitted when a prisoner's property is lost by state officials, regardless of whether the loss was intentional or negligent.
• Martin-Marietta Corp. v. Bendix Corp.
  690 F.2d 558· 6th Cir.· 1982-09-22 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act and abstention doctrines do not bar federal injunctive relief, and the Michigan Take-Over Offers Act's enforcement provisions unconstitutionally burden interstate commerce.
• Thomas v. Howard
  455 F.2d 228· 3d Cir.· 1972-02-09 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the prisoner's claim against his attorney under the Civil Rights Act was barred by the statute of limitations and that the attorney was not acting under color of state law.
• Brown v. Miller
  631 F.2d 408· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-26 ·cited 27×
  A public official's misuse of power, even for personal gain, constitutes action 'under color of state law' for § 1983 claims. Prejudicial admission of irrelevant evidence requires a new trial on damages.
• Wirth v. Surles
  562 F.2d 319· 4th Cir.· 1977-09-22 ·cited 26×
• United Steelworkers OF Am. v. Phelps Dodge Corp.
  865 F.2d 1539· 9th Cir.· 1989-01-18 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the majority's interpretation of certain statements as evidence of conspiracy was an unwarranted inference, particularly given the lack of direct evidence and the context of the situation.
• 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.
• Grady Carroll Ouzts v. Md. Nat'l Ins. Co.
  505 F.2d 547· 9th Cir.· 1974-10-29 ·cited 23×
  The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal, holding that the bail bondsman's actions in forcibly apprehending the plaintiff and transporting him to Nevada did not constitute action "under color of state law." The court found that the bondsman's conduct was purely p
• Kadlec v. Ill. Bell Tel. Co.
  407 F.2d 624· 7th Cir.· 1969-02-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the mere filing of regulations or licensing does not convert private action into action under color of state law for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Keating v. Martin
  638 F.2d 1121· 8th Cir.· 1980-12-09 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the appellant's § 1983 claims against various state officials due to immunity doctrines and lack of state action.
• Revene v. Charles Cnty. Comm'rs
  882 F.2d 870· 4th Cir.· 1989-08-14 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the dismissal of the § 1983 claim and state law tort claim against the deputy sheriff in his individual capacity was error, but dismissal of claims against the Sheriff, Office of Sheriff, and County Commissioners was proper.
• Stanford Williams v. City OF ST. Louis
  783 F.2d 114· 8th Cir.· 1986-01-29 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment sua sponte and on issues not properly raised, and that plaintiffs' substantive due process and equal protection claims are not barred by the adequacy of state remedies.
• Sooner Prods. Co. v. McBRIDE
  708 F.2d 510· 10th Cir.· 1983-05-16 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the appeal of the dismissal order was untimely, and the denial of leave to file a second amended complaint was not an abuse of discretion because the amendment would be futile.
• ORR v. Thorpe
  427 F.2d 1129· 5th Cir.· 1970-06-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a complaint alleging a school board's policy aimed at destroying a teachers' association states a claim under section 1983 for interference with freedom of association.
• Marylee Benavidez v. Gunnell
  722 F.2d 615· 10th Cir.· 1983-12-08 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the prosecutor and police officers were entitled to qualified immunity because they acted in good faith and with probable cause, and that private parties were not liable under §§ 1983 or 1985 for merely reporting a state crime.
• Duncan v. Mr. & Mrs. Harold Peck
  752 F.2d 1135· 6th Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 18×
  The court held that res judicata does not bar a federal § 1983 action challenging the constitutionality of state procedures, and that pursuing state judicial remedies can constitute action under color of state law.
• Crumley v. Snead
  620 F.2d 481· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-30 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a sheriff's delivery of a prisoner to another state while a habeas corpus petition challenging extradition was pending violates federal law and gives rise to a civil rights action.
• Culbertson v. Leland
  528 F.2d 426· 9th Cir.· 1975-10-03 ·cited 18×
  The seizure of a tenant's property by an innkeeper under state innkeeper's lien statutes, without a security interest in the property, constitutes state action.
• Espinoza v. Rollie R. Rogers
  470 F.2d 1174· 10th Cir.· 1972-12-27 ·cited 18×
  An attorney does not act under color of state law merely by accepting employment as a Colorado Public Defender.
• Collins v. Womancare
  878 F.2d 1145· 9th Cir.· 1989-06-23 ·cited 17×
  The court held that a citizen's arrest, even if authorized by state statute, does not automatically constitute action 'under color of state law' for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when the arrest is made by private individuals without significant state involvement.
• Meyer v. State
  415 So. 2d 70· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-06-02 ·cited 16×
  Meyer sought belated appellate review via habeas corpus after his court-appointed public defender failed to timely file his appeal. The court granted the petition but, on the State's motion for rehearing, grappled with whether Polk County v. Dodson undermined the precedent establ
• Chrisman v. Sisters OF ST. Joseph OF Peace
  506 F.2d 308· 9th Cir.· 1974-11-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a private hospital receiving federal funds and subject to state regulation is not acting under color of state law when refusing to perform a sterilization procedure based on religious beliefs, and that the claim for equitable relief was moot after the patient