Procedural Due Process

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

• Am. Trucking Ass'ns, Inc. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  602 F.2d 444· D.C. Cir.· 1979-06-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had the statutory authority to issue a general rule allowing dual operations for motor carriers, finding it consistent with the public interest and national transportation policy.
• Souch v. Califano
  599 F.2d 577· 4th Cir.· 1979-05-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Secretary cannot rely on negative X-ray readings as substantial evidence to deny black lung benefits if the claimant's request to subpoena the physicians who made those readings was denied and the disputed X-rays were not made available for inspection.
• Lincoln C. White v. Acree
  594 F.2d 1385· 10th Cir.· 1979-03-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that claimants who file for administrative relief without demanding immediate court proceedings may not complain of due process violations during a reasonable administrative investigation period.
• Isadore Ludwin v. City OF Cambridge
  592 F.2d 606· 1st Cir.· 1979-02-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that federal courts should abstain from interfering with state tax collection, and that a state declaratory action provides an adequate remedy for challenging tax assessments, even when prepayment is required. Damages claims against local officials require a prior
• José R. Navato, M.D. v. Ivan W. Sletten, M.D.
  560 F.2d 340· 8th Cir.· 1977-07-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff was deprived of a property interest without sufficient procedural due process because he lacked adequate notice and an opportunity to respond to all charges considered by the committee. The court also held that the defendants breached the contrac
• Eagle Motor Lines, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  545 F.2d 1015· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) cannot revoke a motor carrier's operating authority without providing the carrier with an opportunity to be heard, consistent with due process requirements.
• Miller v. Carter
  547 F.2d 1314· 7th Cir.· 1977-01-04 ·cited 10×
  A Chicago ordinance permanently barring individuals convicted of certain offenses from obtaining a public chauffeur's license violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment due to irrational distinctions among ex-offenders.
• Wells v. Bd. OF Regents OF the Murray State Univ.
  545 F.2d 15· 6th Cir.· 1976-11-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that former faculty members who did not acquire tenure under university policy or state law were not denied due process when their contracts were not renewed without a hearing or statement of reasons.
• Sanders v. McCRADY
  537 F.2d 1199· 4th Cir.· 1976-05-24 ·cited 10×
  A claimant must exhaust federal administrative remedies before seeking judicial review, even if the claim involves a state officer and seeks damages not available administratively.
• Hester Maggett v. Norton
  519 F.2d 599· 2d Cir.· 1975-06-30 ·cited 10×
  The adequacy of the Department's procedures for providing actual notice to AFDC recipients presents a substantial constitutional question requiring a three-judge court.
• Zeller v. Donegal Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ.
  517 F.2d 600· 3d Cir.· 1975-05-14 ·cited 10×
  A school official is immune from liability for compensatory damages in civil rights suits unless they knew or should have known their action violated constitutional rights, or acted with malicious intent.
• Mitchell v. W. Feliciana Parish Sch. Bd.
  507 F.2d 662· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the school board acted in good faith under erroneous court orders and that plaintiffs were not entitled to reinstatement or other remedies.
• Equity Mortg. Corp. v. Loftus
  504 F.2d 1071· 4th Cir.· 1974-10-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the government's redemption price under 28 U.S.C. § 2410(d) should be the amount paid at foreclosure sale plus statutory interest and necessary expenses, but not necessarily the full amount of the foreclosing lienholder's debt. It also held that the government
• Vance v. Chester Cnty. Bd. OF Sch. Trs.
  504 F.2d 820· 4th Cir.· 1974-10-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the school board's procedures for non-renewal of a teacher's contract, including oral notice and a post-decision hearing, satisfied due process requirements under the circumstances.
• Ervin Harold Wheeler v. Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles
  297 So. 2d 128· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-07-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the petitioner's specific claim was moot because he ultimately received a hearing, the department should consider providing presuspension hearings to avoid future due process challenges.
• First Girl, Inc. v. Reg'l Manpower Adm'r OF the United States Dep't OF Labor
  499 F.2d 122· 7th Cir.· 1974-07-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's finding of abuse of discretion was proper because the administrative record contained no evidence supporting the denial of alien employment certification.
• T. A. Moynahan Props., Inc. v. Lancaster Vill. Coop., Inc.
  496 F.2d 1114· 7th Cir.· 1974-05-21 ·cited 10×
• Bosely v. City OF Euclid
  496 F.2d 193· 6th Cir.· 1974-05-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the tenants were not denied due process and that the district court correctly granted summary judgment for the City.
• Bradford v. Tarrant Cnty. Junior Coll. Dist.
  492 F.2d 133· 5th Cir.· 1974-04-04 ·cited 10×
  A public employee without tenure or a property interest in continued employment cannot claim a constitutional violation for non-renewal based on speech, absent proof of stigma or damage to reputation.
• Covington v. Anderson
  487 F.2d 660· 9th Cir.· 1973-11-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the decision to suspend an Air National Guard pilot from flight status due to a reduction in force, under the circumstances presented, is not subject to judicial review.
• Campbell v. Masur
  486 F.2d 554· 5th Cir.· 1973-10-29 ·cited 10×
  The court vacated the district court's judgment and remanded the case for reconsideration in light of a new Supreme Court decision regarding jurisdiction.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Scenic Sportswear
  475 F.2d 1226· 6th Cir.· 1973-03-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the weight of evidence supported the Board's finding of an 8(a)(1) violation and that the Board's order was appropriate.
• United States v. Hovsep Chambian Caramian
  468 F.2d 1370· 5th Cir.· 1972-10-26 ·cited 10×
  A defendant's conviction cannot be nullified by the illegality of the means used to bring them within the court's jurisdiction.
• Goldie Ann Betts v. Bd. OF Educ. OF the City OF Chicago
  466 F.2d 629· 7th Cir.· 1972-08-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction, as the plaintiff failed to show a reasonable probability of success on the merits of her due process or state statutory claims.
• Lukac v. Acocks
  466 F.2d 577· 6th Cir.· 1972-08-02 ·cited 10×
  A limited coaching contract does not create a property interest protected by due process, even with long service.
• Arthur Murray Studio OF Wash., Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  458 F.2d 622· 5th Cir.· 1972-03-21 ·cited 10×
• Robles v. EL Paso Cmty. Action Agency
  456 F.2d 189· 5th Cir.· 1972-03-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a non-tenured employee, absent allegations of constitutionally protected activity, is not entitled to a pre-termination hearing, even if the dismissal is based on alleged misconduct.
• United States v. Cordova
  454 F.2d 763· 10th Cir.· 1972-02-09 ·cited 10×
  A defendant cannot be convicted of failing to submit to induction if the Selective Service System provided misleading information that denied the registrant important administrative rights.
• United States v. Whalen
  451 F.2d 755· 8th Cir.· 1971-11-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the induction order was valid because the postponement did not exceed the permissible limit and the defendant failed to show prejudice, and the board was not required to reopen his classification after the induction notice was issued.
• Gerson Grosfeld v. Morris
  448 F.2d 1004· 4th Cir.· 1971-09-01 ·cited 10×
  A local draft board's refusal to reopen a registrant's classification upon a prima facie claim for a III-A hardship deferment, when the new facts arose from circumstances beyond the registrant's control, constitutes 'blatantly lawless' action and is subject to pre-induction judic
• United States v. Goodman
  439 F.2d 810· 9th Cir.· 1971-03-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's claims regarding procedural due process, evidentiary rulings, and jury instructions lacked merit, and there was sufficient evidence of intent to support the conviction.
• The People OF the State OF Cal. v. Pobuta
  437 F.2d 1200· 9th Cir.· 1971-02-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred by denying a removal petition without providing notice and an opportunity to be heard.
• Winfield v. Major John C. Riebel
  438 F.2d 271· 6th Cir.· 1970-12-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant was not entitled to a I-S deferment and that the local board did not abuse its discretion in denying his hardship classification claim.
• Solomon J. Upshaw v. McNAMARA
  435 F.2d 1188· 1st Cir.· 1970-12-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a city commissioner's policy of refusing to appoint pardoned felons to the police force, even if pardoned for reasons other than innocence, does not violate constitutional rights.
• DELTA Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd.
  442 F.2d 730· D.C. Cir.· 1970-12-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) failed to provide Delta Airlines with the procedural due process required for a comparative hearing when awarding new airline routes.
• Murphy OIL Corp. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  431 F.2d 805· 8th Cir.· 1970-09-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the Commission may have authority to order refunds in certain circumstances, it cannot do so without providing an evidentiary hearing, especially when the contract is ambiguous and the parties' intent is unclear.
• Landau v. Colonel Arthur Allen
  424 F.2d 668· 6th Cir.· 1970-04-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner was not denied due process and that there was a basis in fact for his I-A classification, affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Cmty. Serv., Inc. v. United States & Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  418 F.2d 709· 6th Cir.· 1969-11-12 ·cited 10×
  The FCC's denial of waiver requests and subsequent reconsideration was inadequate for judicial review due to insufficient articulation of grounds, violating statutory duties.
• Jacques v. Local 1418
  404 F.2d 703· 5th Cir.· 1968-12-06 ·cited 10×
  The prior judgment dismissing the claim for damages is res judicata because the court intended to dispose of the damage claim on its merits, not pending a rehearing.
• Wynn v. Page
  390 F.2d 545· 10th Cir.· 1968-03-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court correctly denied the application to enforce its prior order because the prisoner had been released and was awaiting re-trial, and the prior order did not preclude re-trial.
• Powell v. McCORMACK
  395 F.2d 577· D.C. Cir.· 1968-02-28 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, finding that the House's judgment on the integrity of its legislative performance, based on official misconduct, did not warrant judicial scrutiny.
• Robertson v. Udall
  349 F.2d 195· D.C. Cir.· 1965-06-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Secretary's rejection of lease offers was warranted due to a failure to comply with agency disclosure regulations and that the administrative proceedings afforded appellants adequate procedural due process.
• Von D. Mizell v. N. Broward Hosp. Dist.
  175 So. 2d 583· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-05-24 ·cited 10×
  A Florida hospital district's board suspended a surgeon's surgical privileges after finding he removed normal tissue in an excessive percentage of appendectomies. The court upheld the suspension on certiorari review, finding substantial evidence supported the board's findings and
• United States v. Norris
  341 F.2d 527· 7th Cir.· 1965-02-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Appeal Board had a basis in fact for denying the ministerial exemption and that any procedural defect in classification was cured by subsequent proceedings.
• Futterman v. Seymour Gerber
  109 So. 2d 575· Fla. 3d DCA· 1959-02-26 ·cited 10×
  Florida appellate court reversed a directed verdict granted in favor of a defendant who challenged the validity of a foreign Illinois judgment on the ground that he was not properly served with process. The court held that the defendant, who raised the affirmative defense of lack
• Powhatan Mining Co. v. Ickes
  118 F.2d 105· 6th Cir.· 1941-03-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Director of the Bituminous Coal Division erred by denying petitioners the right to cross-examine the identity of producers and surrounding circumstances of sales data used in administrative findings, violating the requirement of a full and fair hearing.
• Peppe Park v. Park
  312 So. 3d 1041· Fla. 5th DCA· 2022-03-10 ·cited 9×
  The court affirmed the lower court's order but without prejudice to the appellant filing a motion to reopen the case, recognizing a potential due process violation.
• Vaught v. Vaught
  189 So. 3d 332· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-04-20 ·cited 9×
  Michael Vaught appeals a domestic violence injunction, arguing he was denied due process because the trial court based its decision on allegations in a supplemental affidavit that was never served on him and he received fewer than three business days' notice of the final hearing.
• Alvarez v. U.S. Immigration AND Customs Enforcement
  818 F.3d 1194· 11th Cir.· 2016-03-24 ·cited 9×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the plaintiff has a Bivens remedy for his due process claim against the ICE official, Juan Munoz. The dissent would also find that the district court erred in dismissing the claim based on Heck v. Humphrey, qualified immunity, and the statute
• I Creatives, Inc. v. Premier Printing Solutions, Inc.
  163 So. 3d 606· Fla. 3d DCA· 2015-04-08 ·cited 9×
  The court held that dismissal of an appeal for failure to timely file an initial brief without prior notice warning of potential dismissal violates procedural due process.