Procedural Due Process

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

• Cnty. OF Pasco v. Chris and Wendy Riehl
  620 So. 2d 229· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-06-16 ·cited 14×
  The County of Pasco appealed a trial court order permanently enjoining enforcement of a dangerous dog classification under Florida Statute 767.12, arguing the statute was constitutional. The appellate court affirmed, holding that section 767.12 violates procedural due process bec
• Glasscock v. Armstrong Cork Co.
  946 F.2d 1085· 5th Cir.· 1991-10-24 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict, holding that sufficient evidence supported the compensatory and punitive damage awards, and that Celotex was liable as a successor corporation for pre-acquisition conduct.
• Midnight Sessions, Ltd. v. City OF Philadelphia
  945 F.2d 667· 3d Cir.· 1991-10-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the City should have been granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the takings and procedural due process claims, and on Down South's substantive due process claim, but After Midnight's substantive due process claim requires a new trial.
• Bennie Brewer v. Chauvin
  938 F.2d 860· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-10 ·cited 14×
  A plaintiff awarded back pay for a procedural due process violation must prove that the deprivation of property would not have occurred if proper procedures had been followed; otherwise, back pay is a windfall.
• Griffin v. State
  573 So. 2d 979· Fla. 5th DCA· 1991-01-24 ·cited 14×
  Court reversed denial of Rule 3.850 motion to vacate conviction for aggravated battery where trial judge failed to hold evidentiary hearing or attach record portions to refute claims of coerced plea and jail time credit entitlement.
• Gonzalez v. Sullivan
  914 F.2d 1197· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-12 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Secretary's initial notice to the claimant violated his Fifth Amendment due process rights and that the ALJ failed to adequately articulate reasons for discrediting the claimant's pain testimony.
• Gunderson v. Schlueter
  904 F.2d 407· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff's acquittal on criminal charges precluded a Section 1983 claim for malicious prosecution, and the conduct did not rise to the level of a substantive due process violation.
• Paul and Mona Anetekhai v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  876 F.2d 1218· 5th Cir.· 1989-07-12 ·cited 14×
  The court held that 8 U.S.C. § 1154(h), which requires aliens who marry U.S. citizens while deportation proceedings are pending to reside outside the U.S. for two years, is constitutional. This provision withstands challenges under the Fifth, First, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments.
• Philip W.L. LUM v. Jensen
  876 F.2d 1385· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-31 ·cited 14×
  Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity when the law allegedly violated was not clearly established at the time of the conduct, especially when there is inter-circuit conflict and no binding precedent in the relevant circuit.
• Williams-El v. Johnson
  872 F.2d 224· 8th Cir.· 1989-04-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the jailer Johnson, as reasonable minds could differ on the use of force and the claim presented a substantive due process violation. The court affirmed directed verdicts for other defendants, finding insufficie
• Les E. Roley v. Pierce Cnty. Fire Prot. Dist. NO. 4
  869 F.2d 491· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the fire chief's discharge did not violate equal protection or procedural due process because the distinction between municipal firefighters and district firefighters regarding civil service review was rationally based, and the charges against him did not impl
• W. Martin Haskell, M.D. v. Wash. Twp.
  864 F.2d 1266· 6th Cir.· 1988-12-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendants waived their statute of limitations defense by failing to raise it in their initial responsive pleading. The court also found that the district court's rulings on standing were conflicting and that the Rule 41(b) dismissal was subject to a clear
• Richardson v. The City OF Albuquerque
  857 F.2d 727· 10th Cir.· 1988-09-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the jury's verdict for the defendants on discrimination claims was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court correctly directed a verdict against the plaintiff's due process claim.
• Polk v. Cent. Susquehanna Intermediate Unit 16
  853 F.2d 171· 3d Cir.· 1988-07-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding whether the school district has a blanket policy against providing direct physical therapy, and that the district court applied an erroneous standard by requiring only 'some' educational benefit.
• Lucious Williams, Jr. v. Butz
  843 F.2d 1335· 11th Cir.· 1988-05-03 ·cited 14×
  A district court has inherent equitable power to modify a consent decree's prospective effect in response to changed circumstances, including legislative changes that alter the legal landscape and statutory objectives.
• RR Vill. Ass'n, Inc. v. Denver Sewer Corp. & Town of Roxbury (N.Y.)
  826 F.2d 1197· 2d Cir.· 1987-08-26 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge argues that the court erred by not notifying the New York Attorney General of the constitutional challenge to N.Y.Transp.Corp.L. § 121 and by failing to consider abstention under state law.
• Garrett Brock Trapnell v. Ralston
  819 F.2d 182· 8th Cir.· 1987-05-18 ·cited 14×
  Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity from damages claims if their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.
• Scrivner v. Andrews
  816 F.2d 261· 6th Cir.· 1987-04-20 ·cited 14×
  The Adoption Assistance Act does not create a federal statutory right to "meaningful visitation" enforceable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and the mother's due process claim failed as she ultimately received a hearing.
• Davis v. Robbs
  794 F.2d 1129· 6th Cir.· 1986-07-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the seizure of the plaintiff's rifle was not justified under the search incident to arrest exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement.
• Lovelace v. Se. Mass. Univ.
  793 F.2d 419· 1st Cir.· 1986-06-16 ·cited 14×
  A university's decision not to renew a finite-term contract does not violate due process or the First Amendment, even if the non-renewal is allegedly due to the professor's refusal to lower academic standards, as universities retain discretion in setting academic policy.
• Freeman v. Blair
  793 F.2d 166· 8th Cir.· 1986-06-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the officials were not entitled to absolute immunity for decisions to inspect without a warrant or for license suspensions, and that the law regarding warrantless administrative searches and due process for license suspensions was clearly established, thus den
• Alexander v. City OF Menlo Park
  787 F.2d 1371· 9th Cir.· 1986-04-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff was denied procedural due process by the City's failure to inform him of his bumping rights, but that his Title VII claims failed due to lack of evidence. The court also vacated the attorney's fees award.
• Hayes v. Vessey
  777 F.2d 1149· 6th Cir.· 1985-11-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the rape was too remote a consequence of the defendant's actions to establish proximate cause for an equal protection claim, and that the plaintiff's other constitutional claims were barred by the Parratt rule due to adequate post-deprivation remedies.
• Riverview Invs., Inc. v. Ottawa Cmty. Improvement Corp.
  769 F.2d 324· 6th Cir.· 1985-07-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that plaintiff's procedural due process claim was properly dismissed, but remanded the antitrust claim for further consideration of the state action exemption.
• Wagner v. Higgins
  754 F.2d 186· 6th Cir.· 1985-02-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims, including those for theft of property, were properly dismissed because they were subject to the Parratt doctrine, which requires exhaustion of state post-deprivation remedies for random and unauthorized deprivations of property.
• Woodard v. LOS Fresnos Indep. Sch. Dist.
  732 F.2d 1243· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-29 ·cited 14×
  A high school student's request for corporal punishment instead of suspension, even if a deviation from school rules, does not constitute a denial of constitutional rights if state courts provide adequate remedies.
• Benson v. Scott
  7th Cir.· 1984-05-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that material questions of fact exist regarding Benson's due process claim, precluding summary judgment and requiring remand.
• Philly's v. Byrne
  732 F.2d 87· 7th Cir.· 1984-04-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the local option provision is a valid legislative enactment, not an unconstitutional delegation of authority, and does not violate due process.
• L.R. Bretz v. Zollie Kelman
  722 F.2d 503· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that an alleged plan to prosecute a person, including witness coercion and falsifying evidence, does not state an actionable wrong under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 if it fails to allege the violation of a constitutionally protected interest.
• Price v. City OF Junction
  711 F.2d 582· 5th Cir.· 1983-06-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the city's "junk car" ordinance is a constitutional exercise of police power and does not violate due process, equal protection, or the takings clause.
• Finer Foods Sales Co., Inc. v. Block
  708 F.2d 774· D.C. Cir.· 1983-05-27 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the Secretary of Agriculture's decision finding "flagrant and repeated" violations of the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act, upholding the prohibition on individuals responsibly connected with the licensee from working for another licensee for at least a
• Loraine Pollock v. Baxter Manor Nursing Home
  706 F.2d 236· 8th Cir.· 1983-04-27 ·cited 14×
  A liberty interest is not implicated in employee discharge cases unless the employer disseminates false and defamatory charges.
• In re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Issued ON June 9 v. United States
  697 F.2d 277· 10th Cir.· 1983-01-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the attorney-client privilege does not apply to tax return preparation documents and that the grand jury subpoena was properly issued and enforceable. The court also found the Fourth Amendment claims to be without merit.
• Perkins v. The Bd. OF Directors OF Sch. Admin. Dist. NO. 13
  686 F.2d 49· 1st Cir.· 1982-08-13 ·cited 14×
  A continuing contract teacher in Maine does not possess a constitutionally protected property interest in contract renewal under 20 Me.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 161(5) absent an express 'for cause' requirement.
• Engblom v. Carey
  677 F.2d 957· 2d Cir.· 1982-05-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Third Amendment's protection against quartering troops extends to individuals with a lawful occupation or possession interest in a house, not just fee simple owners. It also held that while the state's emergency justified summary eviction without pre-depri
• Nevels v. Hanlon
  656 F.2d 372· 8th Cir.· 1981-08-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Commissioner's ex parte communications denied the employee due process, but the award of back pay was barred by the Eleventh Amendment.
• Stevens v. Hunt
  646 F.2d 1168· 6th Cir.· 1981-04-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the academic dismissals did not violate substantive due process because the students failed to establish a property right or that the University's actions were arbitrary and capricious.
• Ivory v. Louie L. Wainwright
  393 So. 2d 542· Fla.· 1980-10-30 ·cited 14×
  The statute is unconstitutional as an ex post facto law and violates due process because of its retroactive effect and procedural scheme for imposing cost assessments.
• Rowell v. Oesterle
  626 F.2d 437· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction to entertain the petition and that Florida was not obligated to provide free legal counsel in this civil custody dispute.
• Fowler v. The United States
  633 F.2d 1258· 8th Cir.· 1980-09-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that summary termination of a mentally retarded federal employee in the excepted service, without procedural protections afforded to competitive service employees, violates the equal protection strand of the Fifth Amendment when there is no rational basis for the d
• Mitchell v. Hicks
  614 F.2d 1016· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint adequately stated a claim for a due process violation, as prison regulations may create a liberty interest in remaining in general population status.
• Spokane Cnty. Legal Servs., Inc. v. The Legal Servs. Corp.
  614 F.2d 662· 9th Cir.· 1980-02-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction and that while the procedural due process claims were properly dismissed, the claims regarding the merits of the LSC decision (arbitrary and capricious, statutory violation) require remand for review under a r
• Millard W. Simineo v. Sch. Dist. NO. 16
  594 F.2d 1353· 10th Cir.· 1979-03-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict regarding the plaintiff's section 1983 claims, including First Amendment violations and lack of procedural due process, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instruct
• BAY Area News, Inc. v. POE
  364 So. 2d 830· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-11-22 ·cited 14×
  Bay Area News, Inc. and other adult bookstore operators challenged the constitutionality of Tampa City Code § 20-65, which authorized the city to revoke business licenses upon conviction of crimes involving moral turpitude committed in the course of the licensed business. The cou
• Drayton v. McCALL
  584 F.2d 1208· 2d Cir.· 1978-10-02 ·cited 14×
  A federal prisoner granted parole but not yet released is entitled to due process procedural safeguards in a parole rescission hearing, though not necessarily all those required for parole revocation.
• P. A. B. Produits ET Appareils de Beaute v. Satinine Societa in Nome Collettivo di S.A. e. M. Usellini
  570 F.2d 328· C.C.P.A.· 1978-02-16 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board erred in finding abandonment because the petitioner failed to establish the requisite two-year period of nonuse and the registrant was not given fair notice or opportunity to rebut the claim.
• High Ridge Mgmt. Corp. v. State
  354 So. 2d 377· Fla.· 1977-12-22 ·cited 14×
  The Florida Supreme Court invalidated a nursing home rating system established by the Omnibus Nursing Home Reform Act of 1976 as an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority for failing to provide objective guidelines and standards, while severing the unconstitutional
• Sherrill v. Knight
  569 F.2d 124· D.C. Cir.· 1977-12-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the government need not articulate highly specific standards for White House press pass denials, it must publish a meaningful standard based on presidential security and provide notice, an opportunity to rebut, and a written decision to applicants.
• New Motor Vehicle Bd. of Cal. v. Orrin W. FOX Co.
  434 U.S. 1345· U.S.· 1977-12-06 ·cited 14×
  The Circuit Justice granted a stay of the District Court's injunction, finding that the state's interest in regulating automobile dealerships outweighed the respondents' claimed liberty interest, which was not a protected property interest requiring a pre-deprivation hearing.
• Cooper v. Riddle
  540 F.2d 731· 4th Cir.· 1976-08-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the procedural due process requirements delineated in Wolff v. McDonnell are not applicable to reclassification proceedings by the Institutional Classification Committee (ICC).