Procedural Due Process

3,605 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Sheena Yarbrough v. Decatur Hous. Auth.
  941 F.3d 1022· 11th Cir.· 2019-10-29 ·cited 22×
  The Due Process Clause requires that a decision to terminate a Section 8 housing voucher be supported by 'some evidence,' and the evidence presented here met that standard.
• United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Salgado
  22 So. 3d 594· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-08-05 ·cited 22×
  United Automobile Insurance Company sought certiorari review of a circuit court decision affirming a declaratory judgment that an insured's no-fault motor vehicle insurance policy remained valid despite the insurer's attempt to rescind it for material misrepresentation. The Flori
• Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales
  545 U.S. 748· U.S.· 2005-06-27 ·cited 22×
  The Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause does not protect a state-mandated procedure as a property interest in itself, nor does it federalize all mandatory state-law directions to executive officers.
• City OF Coconut Creek v. City OF Deerfield Beach
  840 So. 2d 389· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-03-19 ·cited 22×
  City of Coconut Creek challenged a site plan approval granted by the City of Deerfield Beach for an energy center, claiming it violated the Comprehensive Plan and constitutional due process. The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that Coconut Creek failed to comply with a stat
• Levey v. D'Angelo
  819 So. 2d 864· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-05-29 ·cited 22×
  Lewis Levey, a trial attorney, appeals a contempt citation for conduct during supplemental proceedings. The trial court imposed a fine and jail sentence labeled as indirect civil contempt, but the appellate court determined the sanction was actually criminal contempt that violate
• Dino Kaklamanos and Keely Kaklamanos v. Allstate Ins. Co.
  796 So. 2d 555· Fla. 1st DCA· 2001-07-26 ·cited 22×
  An insured can sue an insurance company for unpaid PIP and medpay benefits without first paying the medical provider or waiting for the provider to sue, if the insurer fails to pay within 30 days of receiving notice of a covered loss. The court reversed summary judgment for Allst
• Berman v. State of Fla. & Chris Jones
  751 So. 2d 612· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-12-01 ·cited 22×
  Randy Berman, an assistant public defender, was adjudged guilty of direct criminal contempt for loudly exclaiming and pounding the defense table upon hearing a not guilty verdict in a first-degree murder case. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the conviction, finding b
• Jennings v. State
  744 So. 2d 1126· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-10-20 ·cited 22×
  William Jennings appealed his armed robbery conviction and sentence under the Prisoner Releasee Reoffender Act, challenging the admission of collateral crime evidence regarding a subsequent robbery attempt and the constitutionality of the sentencing statute. The Florida Fourth Di
• City of W. Covina v. Perkins
  525 U.S. 234· U.S.· 1999-01-13 ·cited 22×
  The Due Process Clause does not require law enforcement to provide notice of seized property to owners seeking remedies.
• Adams v. Sewell
  946 F.2d 757· 11th Cir.· 1991-11-04 ·cited 22×
  James Adams, an Environmental Coordinator for Orange County, Florida, was terminated following an investigation into sexual harassment allegations. Adams sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming the County violated his procedural and substantive due process rights. The district cour
• Smith v. Herb Maschner
  899 F.2d 940· 10th Cir.· 1990-03-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a prisoner's claim of retaliation for exercising his right of access to the courts, based on circumstantial evidence of suspicious timing and actions, could survive summary judgment. However, claims of property deprivation without due process were barred by ad
• Sample v. Diecks
  885 F.2d 1099· 3d Cir.· 1989-09-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a prisoner held beyond his sentence term may recover under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 if a prison official acted with deliberate indifference to the unjustified deprivation of liberty, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in estopping defendants from
• Larry and Karen Spielman v. Hildebrand
  873 F.2d 1377· 10th Cir.· 1989-05-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a violation of any federal constitutional or statutory rights, as the Spielmans received a meaningful hearing prior to the deprivation of any liberty interest.
• Jackson v. Warden Burl Cain
  864 F.2d 1235· 5th Cir.· 1989-02-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment for the defendants on the procedural and substantive claims, as Jackson failed to demonstrate genuine issues of material fact or violations of his constitutional rights.
• Maldonado-Perez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  865 F.2d 328· D.C. Cir.· 1989-01-10 ·cited 22×
  The court held that denying an alien a reasonable opportunity to present his asylum case, by simultaneously denying a change of venue and a continuance, and ordering deportation in absentia, was an abuse of discretion.
• Rawleigh C. Wilson v. The Civil Town OF Clayton
  839 F.2d 375· 7th Cir.· 1988-02-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Parratt doctrine, which allows dismissal of procedural due process claims when an adequate post-deprivation state remedy exists for random and unauthorized acts, does not apply to claims against municipalities acting under official policy or to claims wher
• Chloree Vaden v. Vill. OF Maywood
  809 F.2d 361· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-07 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the village ordinances restricting mobile food vendors were a rational means of achieving legitimate government interests and did not violate due process or equal protection. The court also held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for conspiracy under 4
• Ortiz v. Melquiades Burgos
  807 F.2d 6· 1st Cir.· 1986-12-12 ·cited 22×
  Stepfather and siblings do not have a constitutionally protected interest in the companionship of their adult son and brother, actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Skeets v. Johnson
  805 F.2d 767· 8th Cir.· 1986-11-12 ·cited 22×
  The majority held that an at-will state employee possessed a constitutionally protected property right due to grievance procedures and was entitled to reinstatement with backpay without proving he would have been discharged absent procedural errors. The dissent disagreed with all
• Sanders v. United States Postal Serv.
  801 F.2d 1328· Fed. Cir.· 1986-09-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Merit Systems Protection Board's decision affirming the removal of an employee for dealing in cocaine was supported by substantial evidence and had a rational basis, despite reliance on hearsay evidence.
• Jackson Water Works, Inc. v. The Pub. Utils. Comm'n OF the State OF Cal.
  793 F.2d 1090· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-08 ·cited 22×
  The statutory scheme allowing a city to unilaterally choose between state court condemnation proceedings (with jury trial and appeal rights) and Public Utilities Commission proceedings (without such rights) for similarly-situated utilities violates the Equal Protection Clause.
• Greco v. Guss
  775 F.2d 161· 7th Cir.· 1985-10-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that while the seizure of property might have involved state action, the availability of post-deprivation remedies, such as tort actions, satisfied due process requirements, thus affirming the summary judgment.
• Long v. Dir., Off. OF Workers' Comp. Programs
  767 F.2d 1578· 9th Cir.· 1985-08-09 ·cited 22×
  An employee injured in the back cannot receive benefits under scheduled injury sections for a resulting leg impairment; compensation is limited to the unscheduled injury provision for loss of wage-earning capacity.
• Elana Casines v. Murchek
  766 F.2d 1494· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-29 ·cited 22×
  State officials are entitled to qualified immunity for violating clearly established state law if federal rights were not clearly established. Post-termination claims may require abstention or reconsideration under Parratt v. Taylor.
• Razatos v. The Colo. Supreme Court
  746 F.2d 1429· 10th Cir.· 1984-10-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over the due process claim and that the Colorado attorney disciplinary scheme does not violate due process, even when credibility is at issue, because the Supreme Court retains ultimate review power and discre
• Rosewitz v. Patience Latting
  689 F.2d 175· 10th Cir.· 1982-09-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the city's grievance procedure, which denied an employee the right to an attorney, confrontation, and cross-examination, did not violate procedural due process, but the denial of the defendant's motion for attorney's fees without a hearing was an error.
• Gordon v. Savage
  383 So. 2d 646· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-03-12 ·cited 22×
  Dr. Thomas Gordon, a dentist, sought a Writ of Prohibition to prevent the State Board of Dentistry from proceeding with a second administrative accusation filed 104 days after dismissal of the original accusation. The court denied the writ, holding that administrative proceedings
• McKNIGHT v. Se. Pa. Transp. Auth.
  583 F.2d 1229· 3d Cir.· 1978-09-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's claim regarding a deprivation of his liberty interest, as the alleged stigmatizing charge of intoxication could be a factual question for trial. The court also vacated the dismissal of the property interes
• Gulf & E. Dev. Corp. v. City OF Fort Lauderdale
  354 So. 2d 57· Fla.· 1978-01-12 ·cited 22×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that due process requires affected landowners receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before a planning and zoning board—not just before the city commission—when considering rezoning of property. The court rejected the argument that notice at
• Alsager v. Dist. Court OF Polk Cnty.
  545 F.2d 1137· 8th Cir.· 1976-12-08 ·cited 22×
  The judgment is affirmed because the State of Iowa violated plaintiffs' substantive and procedural due process rights by failing to show threshold harm and by providing inadequate notice of conduct warranting termination.
• Jarius Piphus v. Carey
  545 F.2d 30· 7th Cir.· 1976-11-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that damages and equitable/declaratory relief should have been granted for due process violations, even without proof of individualized injury.
• Koch v. Yunich
  533 F.2d 80· 2d Cir.· 1976-04-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the challenged sections of the New York Civil Service Law do not violate substantive due process, procedural due process, equal protection, or the contract clause, and that the claims were properly dismissed.
• Giuseppe Giambanco v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  531 F.2d 141· 3d Cir.· 1976-02-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Administrative Procedure Act does not apply to the Board of Immigration Appeals' review of adjustment of status and waiver proceedings, and that a judicial recommendation against deportation under INA § 241(b)(2) prevents the Service from considering the c
• Thomas v. Warden Frank J. Pate
  516 F.2d 889· 7th Cir.· 1975-03-25 ·cited 22×
• Alderman v. The Philadelphia Hous. Auth.
  496 F.2d 164· 3d Cir.· 1974-04-16 ·cited 22×
  A prior restraint on all discussion of political matters by public employees is an impermissible infringement of First Amendment rights, even if justified by an interest in impartiality.
• Gaffney v. Silk
  488 F.2d 1248· 1st Cir.· 1973-12-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying the plaintiffs' motion to amend their complaint, as the amended complaint sufficiently stated a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• United States v. Thompson
  431 F.2d 1265· 3d Cir.· 1970-09-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the registrant was denied procedural due process when the local board failed to allow him to rebut his wife's adverse statements after he requested a reopening of his classification.
• Ricucci v. The United States
  425 F.2d 1252· Ct. Cl.· 1970-05-15 ·cited 22×
  The court's reasoning and result are concurred with, but additional issues regarding due process, burden of proof, cross-examination, substantial evidence, and fairness of the hearing are raised.
• Chiriaco v. United States
  339 F.2d 588· 5th Cir.· 1964-12-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the appellant's claim for reinstatement is barred by laches due to an unreasonable delay in filing suit.
• Young v. Wainwright
  326 F.2d 255· 5th Cir.· 1964-01-09 ·cited 22×
  Failure to comply with state statutes requiring prompt presentment before a magistrate and advising of rights, standing alone, does not render a confession inadmissible in state court if the confession was otherwise voluntary.
• United States ex rel. Gyula Paktorovics v. Murff
  260 F.2d 610· 2d Cir.· 1958-11-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, particularly in the special circumstances of Hungarian refugees, are entitled to a hearing before their parole can be revoked.
• Pate v. United States
  243 F.2d 99· 5th Cir.· 1957-03-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the draft board's classification denial had a basis in fact, and therefore the courts could not overturn it.
• Winhoven v. Swope
  195 F.2d 181· 9th Cir.· 1952-02-28 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a federal prisoner seeking habeas corpus relief after denial of a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 must demonstrate the inadequacy of the § 2255 remedy, and a second or successive § 2255 motion is generally not permitted.
• Cont'l OIL Co. v. United States
  184 F.2d 802· 9th Cir.· 1950-10-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Secretary of the Interior lacked the authority to unilaterally set minimum values for crude oil royalties under the leases, but that lessees were obligated to pay royalties based on the actual market value, which the trial court correctly determined to be
• Victor v. Porter
  157 F.2d 769· Emer. Ct. App.· 1946-10-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Price Administrator's regulation and formula for adjusting maximum rents based on construction costs were valid, and that a subsequent de novo hearing cured any initial procedural due process defects.
• Dep't OF Revenue v. Holley
  86 So. 3d 1199· Fla. 1st DCA· 2012-05-01 ·cited 21×
  The Department of Revenue appeals a circuit court order vacating an arrearage determination and relieving the father of his child support obligations based on laches, equitable estoppel, and alleged due process violations caused by delay. The appellate court reverses, holding tha
• J.A.H. v. State of Fla. & Dep't of Child. & Families
  20 So. 3d 425· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-10-14 ·cited 21×
  J.A.H. was convicted of direct criminal contempt after refusing to surrender his cell phone during a dependency hearing and allegedly making disrespectful statements. The First District Court of Appeal reversed because the trial court failed to comply with mandatory procedural re
• Seling v. Young
  531 U.S. 250· U.S.· 2001-01-17 ·cited 21×
  A statute's civil nature is determined by its face, not by the manner of its implementation.
• Pittsley v. Sergeant Philip Warish
  927 F.2d 3· 1st Cir.· 1991-02-27 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the police officers' actions and statements, while potentially wrongful, did not rise to the level of a constitutional violation actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and therefore, the directed verdicts for the defendants were appropriate.
• Manatee Cnty. v. Kuehnel
  542 So. 2d 1356· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-04-26 ·cited 21×
  Manatee County challenged a circuit court's reversal of the county commission's denial of a rezoning request. The District Court of Appeal, applying the narrow standard of review for appellate decisions under Florida Rule 9.030(b)(2)(B), denied the county's petition for certiorar