Procedural Due Process

3,616 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 62 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Landrum v. James Rummer Timber Harvesting, Inc.
  645 So. 2d 577· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-11-18 ·cited 24×
  Landrum appealed a discharge from unemployment benefits based on alleged misconduct. The Unemployment Appeals Commission dismissed his appeal as untimely, but the court reversed, holding that the mailing date alone was insufficient to prove timely notice and remanded for an evide
• Nostimo, Inc. v. The City OF Clearwater
  594 So. 2d 779· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-01-03 ·cited 24×
  Pick Kwik appealed the dismissal of its facial and as-applied constitutional challenge to Clearwater's conditional use permit ordinance after being denied permission to sell beer and wine. The court affirmed the ordinance was constitutional on its face but reversed the dismissal
• Mercer v. Mitchell
  908 F.2d 763· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by imposing fines for civil contempt without providing the County with adequate due process, specifically a show-cause order and a hearing.
• Kirkland v. Northside Indep. Sch. Dist.
  890 F.2d 794· 5th Cir.· 1989-12-22 ·cited 24×
  A public school teacher's use of a non-approved supplemental reading list, without seeking administrative approval, does not constitute constitutionally protected speech on a matter of public concern.
• Baker v. I.G. Racansky
  887 F.2d 183· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the social workers were entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct in taking a child into temporary protective custody did not violate clearly established law.
• Feliciano-Angulo v. Hon. Hector Rivera-Cruz
  858 F.2d 40· 1st Cir.· 1988-09-30 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendant was entitled to qualified immunity from damages for the procedural due process claim, but not for the First Amendment claims, as factual issues regarding motive remained.
• Duchesne v. Wylie L. Williams, Jr.
  849 F.2d 1004· 6th Cir.· 1988-06-20 ·cited 24×
• In re AIR Conditioning v. Leasing Serv. Corp.
  845 F.2d 293· 11th Cir.· 1988-05-17 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the transfer of a certificate of deposit by a debtor to secure a letter of credit for a creditor constitutes a preferential transfer under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b), and the trustee can recover the property from the creditor.
• Mahoney v. Hankin
  844 F.2d 64· 2d Cir.· 1988-04-12 ·cited 24×
  The denial of a claim of qualified immunity is an appealable final decision only to the extent that it turns on an issue of law, not fact.
• Justice v. Dennis
  834 F.2d 380· 4th Cir.· 1987-11-25 ·cited 24×
  The jury instruction imposing a substantive due process standard for an excessive force claim was error requiring remand for a new trial, as the claim properly invoked Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable seizures.
• McMASTER v. Cabinet FOR Human Resources
  824 F.2d 518· 6th Cir.· 1987-07-29 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the plaintiffs' claims were barred by the statute of limitations and/or claim preclusion.
• Drake v. Scott
  823 F.2d 239· 8th Cir.· 1987-07-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that an employee's job is not a property interest protected by due process unless the employment contract expressly provides for termination only for cause, not merely impliedly.
• Joseph Darlak, M.D. v. Bobear
  814 F.2d 1055· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Eleventh Amendment barred suits against state entities DHHR and Charity, and that Dr. Darlak received sufficient due process regarding his suspension from hospital privileges.
• Brown v. Frey
  807 F.2d 1407· 8th Cir.· 1986-12-24 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the adjustment board provided a constitutionally adequate written statement of evidence and reasons, and that the decision was supported by 'some evidence' in the record, thus satisfying due process requirements.
• Batterton v. The Tex. Gen. Land Off.
  783 F.2d 1220· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-03 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the employees did not possess a constitutionally protected property interest in their jobs under Texas law and failed to present sufficient evidence to support their First Amendment claim, thus affirming the grant of summary judgment.
• Hicks v. Feeney
  770 F.2d 375· 3d Cir.· 1985-08-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the Parratt post-deprivation remedy exception and vacated the grant of qualified immunity, remanding for reconsideration in light of Mitchell v. Forsyth.
• Findeisen v. N. E. Indep. Sch. Dist.
  749 F.2d 234· 5th Cir.· 1984-12-26 ·cited 24×
  The court concurred that the record did not entirely exclude the possibility of bad faith termination, which could entitle the plaintiff to relief under section 1983.
• Sipes v. United States
  744 F.2d 1418· 10th Cir.· 1984-09-27 ·cited 24×
  A probationary federal employee terminated within one year of appointment under the Vietnam Veterans' Readjustment Act of 1974 does not possess a constitutionally protected property or liberty interest in continued employment, and a complaint about personal employment matters doe
• Sher v. Coughlin
  739 F.2d 77· 2d Cir.· 1984-07-11 ·cited 24×
  A prisoner's transfer between facilities or placement in restrictive confinement for administrative reasons, even if motivated in part by punitive intent, does not violate constitutional rights if the administrative reasons alone would have justified the action.
• Scott v. City OF Sioux City
  736 F.2d 1207· 8th Cir.· 1984-06-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the city's zoning ordinances enacted to further urban renewal goals were protected by state action immunity from federal antitrust claims, and that the constitutional claims were meritless.
• Ford v. Strickland
  734 F.2d 538· 11th Cir.· 1984-05-30 ·cited 24×
  The court should affirm the district court's judgment denying the stay of execution and certificate of probable cause.
• Riley D. Walker v. United States
  744 F.2d 67· 10th Cir.· 1984-03-06 ·cited 24×
  A probationary federal employee terminated for dishonesty, whose liberty interest is implicated by stigmatizing statements and foreclosed future employment, is entitled to procedural due process, including a meaningful opportunity to clear their name.
• White v. S. Park Indep. Sch. Dist.
  693 F.2d 1163· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the plaintiff's due process and First Amendment claims were without merit, but reversed the award of attorney fees to the defendants due to the lack of specific findings supporting the claim that the suit was frivolous.
• Chicago & N. W. Transp. Co. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  678 F.2d 665· 7th Cir.· 1982-04-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the fair market value of an abandoned railroad line, for purposes of forced sale under the Staggers Rail Act, is its value for non-rail use, not its value for continued rail service, and this value is constitutionally permissible even if it is only salvage val
• United States v. Fitch OIL Co.
  676 F.2d 673· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1982-03-23 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Department of Energy's audit policy was not binding on the agency and that the subpoenas duces tecum were valid and enforceable.
• Hardy L. Paschal v. Fla. Pub. Emps. Relations Comm'n
  666 F.2d 1381· 11th Cir.· 1982-02-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying leave to amend the complaint to add a due process theory, nor in denying a judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the First Amendment claim.
• United States v. Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($8
  645 F.2d 836· 9th Cir.· 1981-05-22 ·cited 24×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority incorrectly overruled precedent by not requiring prejudice as an element of a procedural due process claim based on delay.
• The Bath Club, Inc. v. Dade Cnty.
  394 So. 2d 110· Fla.· 1981-01-29 ·cited 24×
  The Bath Club challenged its real property tax assessments for 1976-1978, contending that the assessments were based on speculative factors, that the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board's composition violated Florida's dual officeholding prohibition, and that allowing special mas
• Nanette Griffeth v. Detrich
  603 F.2d 118· 9th Cir.· 1979-08-29 ·cited 24×
• Webster v. Redmond
  599 F.2d 793· 7th Cir.· 1979-05-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the plaintiff did not possess a constitutionally protected liberty or property interest in promotion to principal, and thus was not denied due process. The court also affirmed the dismissal of racial discrimination claims.
• Arsberry v. Allyn R. Sielaff
  586 F.2d 37· 7th Cir.· 1978-11-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment, as genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether plaintiffs' segregation infringed upon state-created liberty interests triggering procedural due process protections.
• Wells Fargo Armored Serv. Corp. v. Ga. Pub. Serv. Comm'n
  547 F.2d 938· 5th Cir.· 1977-02-28 ·cited 24×
  A motor carrier's certificate of public convenience and necessity does not create a property interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment against competition, and therefore, the grant of a competitor's certificate does not constitute a deprivation of property requiring procedur
• Powell v. Ward
  542 F.2d 101· 2d Cir.· 1976-09-17 ·cited 24×
  Prison officials responsible for security are not automatically disqualified from adjudicating security-related disciplinary charges solely due to their positions. A seven-day limit for disciplinary hearings can be extended in emergencies with proper authorization.
• Fla. Retail Fed'n, Inc. v. Mayo
  331 So. 2d 308· Fla.· 1976-04-14 ·cited 24×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the Public Service Commission's approval of General Telephone Company's rate structure based on the "value of service" principle rather than "cost of service." The Court rejected the Florida Retail Federation's challenge, holding that the Commissi
• Fern v. Thorp Pub. Sch.
  532 F.2d 1120· 7th Cir.· 1976-04-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in balancing factors for a preliminary injunction, and therefore the injunction should not be vacated.
• 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.
• Muscare v. Quinn
  520 F.2d 1212· 7th Cir.· 1975-05-21 ·cited 24×
  A public employee facing temporary suspension for less than 30 days is entitled to a pre-suspension hearing where they can be informed of and challenge the charges.
• Shirck v. Thomas
  486 F.2d 691· 7th Cir.· 1973-04-06 ·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.
• Henriques v. The Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  465 F.2d 119· 2d Cir.· 1972-07-27 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the petitioner's deportation hearing was not invalid due to the absence of counsel because the sole issue was undisputed overstaying of a visa, and counsel could not have altered the outcome.
• The Herald Co. v. Vincent
  392 F.2d 354· 2d Cir.· 1968-03-22 ·cited 24×
  The district court correctly dismissed the employer's complaint because it lacked jurisdiction to review the NLRB's representation proceeding, and the employer's due process claim was insubstantial.
• Campbell Soup Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  380 F.2d 372· 5th Cir.· 1967-06-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that Campbell Soup Company violated the Act by interrogating and threatening employees regarding union activity, but its rules on distribution and solicitation were not entirely invalid as ordered by the Board.
• Allen v. Int'l Alliance of Theatrical
  338 F.2d 309· 5th Cir.· 1964-10-23 ·cited 24×
  A union member is deprived of a 'full and fair hearing' when charged with violating an inapplicable union rule and found guilty, entitling them to relief.
• Jones v. Bd. OF Control of the State of Fla.
  131 So. 2d 713· Fla.· 1961-06-23 ·cited 24×
  A University of Florida law professor challenged his dismissal for filing to run for circuit judge in violation of a Board of Control rule prohibiting employees from seeking public office. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the rule as constitutional and a valid exercise of the Boa
• In re Petition for Involuntary Dissolution of Fredcris
  101 So. 2d 49· Fla. 3d DCA· 1958-02-06 ·cited 24×
  A party who consents to an order and accepts benefits thereunder is precluded from later challenging the validity of a prior decree upon which that order was dependent.
• United States ex rel. Master v. Baldi
  198 F.2d 113· 3d Cir.· 1952-07-08 ·cited 24×
  The district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition without a hearing, as the allegations of a coerced confession, if true, constitute a violation of due process.
• Standard Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd.
  177 F.2d 18· D.C. Cir.· 1949-05-02 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Civil Aeronautics Board cannot suspend an air carrier's registration without providing an opportunity for oral presentation, even if the registration letter permits immediate suspension.
• State of Fla. ex rel. Jed Pittman v. Stanjeski
  562 So. 2d 673· Fla.· 1990-05-17 ·cited 23×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld section 61.14(5), which creates automatic judgments for delinquent child support payments, but only as interpreted to require a hearing before a judicial officer when an obligor files a timely response and to preserve equitable defenses and Rule 1
• Bennett v. White
  865 F.2d 1395· 3d Cir.· 1989-01-13 ·cited 23×
  The court held that summary judgment for the class was required due to violations of federal law and the Constitution, but remanded for reconsideration of the limited relief ordered by the district court.
• Edelstein v. Hon. Robert N. Wilentz
  812 F.2d 128· 3d Cir.· 1987-02-26 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the New Jersey Supreme Court Rule granting absolute immunity to ethics grievants is rationally related to the state's legitimate interest in regulating attorney conduct and does not violate federal constitutional rights. The court also affirmed the denial of t