Procedural Due Process

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

• Haley v. Dormire
  845 F.2d 1488· 8th Cir.· 1988-05-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the complaints were legally frivolous and properly dismissed by the district court under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d).
• Levi v. Univ. OF Tex. AT SAN Antonio
  840 F.2d 277· 5th Cir.· 1988-03-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a rational trier of fact could not find the university's tenure decision irrational, and insufficient evidence was presented for the conspiracy claim.
• Save OUR Dunes v. Ala. Dep't OF Env't Mgmt.
  834 F.2d 984· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-31 ·cited 6×
• The Conklin Ctr. v. Williams
  519 So. 2d 38· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-12-24 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Commission on Human Relations violated procedural due process by finding and enjoining Conklin Center for maintaining a discriminatory work environment without notice to Conklin or litigation of that issue at the administrative hearing. The court quashed the Commissio
• Pub. Serv. Co. OF NEW Hampshire v. Town OF W. Newbury
  835 F.2d 380· 1st Cir.· 1987-12-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the company failed to demonstrate a likelihood of irreparable harm or success on the merits, and therefore the denial of a preliminary injunction was not an abuse of discretion.
• Manning v. Energy Conversion Devices, Inc.
  833 F.2d 1096· 2d Cir.· 1987-11-20 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's order compelling arbitration, finding that the appellants failed to present an adequate basis to oppose or vacate the order despite procedural irregularities.
• Knudson v. City OF Ellensburg
  832 F.2d 1142· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-18 ·cited 6×
  A former police officer has a constitutionally protected property interest in disability medical benefits, and termination of these benefits without a predeprivation hearing violates due process.
• Bd. OF Trs. v. Eberhard Foods, Inc.
  831 F.2d 1258· 6th Cir.· 1987-10-21 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the statutory presumptions in the MPPAA deprive employers of procedural due process and would reverse and remand.
• Freeman v. Rideout
  826 F.2d 194· 2d Cir.· 1987-08-14 ·cited 6×
  The court should rehear the case in banc because the panel decision conflicts with established law regarding substantive due process.
• David Yashon, M.D. v. William E. Hunt, M.D.
  825 F.2d 1016· 6th Cir.· 1987-08-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Medical Staff Administrative Committee's (MSAC) consideration of charges previously addressed in disciplinary proceedings was not barred by administrative res judicata, and that the MSAC hearing did not violate plaintiff's procedural due process rights.
• Brandon v. Dist. of Columbia Bd. of Parole
  823 F.2d 644· D.C. Cir.· 1987-07-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a prisoner's claim that a parole board failed to follow its own procedures does not implicate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, as procedural rules themselves do not create a constitutionally protected liberty interest. The court also held that th
• Colin R. Folsom v. Folsom
  509 So. 2d 1330· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-07-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that an order of indirect criminal contempt must be vacated if the trial judge fails to include a recitation of the facts constituting the contempt in the judgment of guilt, as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.840(a)(6).
• Green v. McCALL
  822 F.2d 284· 2d Cir.· 1987-06-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that post-Drayton Supreme Court decisions have not undermined Drayton's conclusion that a parole grantee has a protectable liberty interest, nor have they invalidated the procedural due process requirements established in Drayton for parole rescission hearings.
• United States v. Williams
  819 F.2d 605· 5th Cir.· 1987-06-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion for post-conviction relief, as the evidence did not create reasonable cause to doubt the defendant's competency.
• United States v. Rachels
  820 F.2d 325· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in considering the prosecutor's allegations about the log book, the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights were not violated, and the sentence was not disparate.
• In the Interest of C.G. v. State
  506 So. 2d 1131· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-05-08 ·cited 6×
  Parents challenged a trial court's finding that their six-year-old daughter was a dependent child due to sexual abuse by the father, and disputed the court's disposition order placing the child with a relative in Germany rather than allowing reunification. The court affirmed the
• Watts v. Off. OF Pers. Mgmt.
  814 F.2d 1576· Fed. Cir.· 1987-04-01 ·cited 6×
  An individual employed by a CIA proprietary corporation is not considered "appointed in the civil service" for retirement benefit purposes unless there is a formal appointment process, even if they performed federal functions.
• City OF Hollywood v. S. Broward Hosp. Dist.
  504 So. 2d 1308· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-03-04 ·cited 6×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal quashed a circuit court's decision approving a helicopter landing pad for a hospital, holding that the circuit court improperly applied a "balancing of public interests" test rather than the limited appellate standard requiring review of proce
• The Sarasota Herald-Tribune v. J.T.J.
  502 So. 2d 930· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-01-09 ·cited 6×
  The Sarasota Herald-Tribune challenged a trial court order prohibiting publication of the names of a minor victim and juvenile defendant in a homicide case. The appellate court quashed the order because the judge imposed it without notice to or a hearing with the news media, viol
• Dep't OF Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles of the State of Fla. v. Spells
  502 So. 2d 19· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-12-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles properly revoked the driver's license for ten years based on prior convictions, as the statute mandates a ten-year revocation for a third DUI offense within ten years.
• Chalfy v. Marrone
  804 F.2d 20· 2d Cir.· 1986-10-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellants' constitutional claims regarding TLC's administration of limousine licensing requirements were without merit and affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment.
• Ronald A.X. Stokes v. Fair
  795 F.2d 235· 1st Cir.· 1986-07-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Massachusetts Department of Corrections regulations create a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause, requiring procedural due process for inmates placed in awaiting action status.
• Adib Zaky, M.D. v. United States Veterans Admin.
  793 F.2d 832· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's statements regarding patient care were made in the context of internal employment disputes and did not constitute speech on a matter of public concern protected by the First Amendment. The court also found that while a liberty interest was impl
• Gargiul v. Tompkins
  790 F.2d 265· 2d Cir.· 1986-05-14 ·cited 6×
  The dissent argues that New York res judicata law does not preclude the plaintiff's section 1983 claim, and that the majority erred in considering the good-faith immunity defense.
• D.A. Delahoussaye v. Seale
  788 F.2d 1091· 5th Cir.· 1986-05-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the temporary suspension of a warehouse license, followed by a prompt post-deprivation hearing and other procedural safeguards, satisfied the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Cook v. Bilia Morrill
  783 F.2d 593· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-26 ·cited 6×
  The Sixth Amendment right to a trial in the district where the crime was committed does not apply to state prosecutions, and a change of venue in a state case does not violate due process unless it results in a conviction obtained without due process.
• Joseph H.L. Boston v. Webb
  783 F.2d 1163· 4th Cir.· 1986-02-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff received sufficient procedural due process, including notice and an opportunity to be heard, to protect his liberty interest in his reputation, even without the right to cross-examine accusers.
• Misek v. The City OF Chicago
  783 F.2d 98· 7th Cir.· 1986-02-11 ·cited 6×
  Public employees with statutory tenure have a property interest in their jobs, entitling them to due process protections, including a hearing, before termination, even if the employer claims reorganization, unless the reorganization is actual and not pretextual.
• Genova v. Town OF Southampton
  776 F.2d 1560· 2d Cir.· 1985-11-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that principles of issue preclusion, derived from the prior state court judgment, required dismissal of the appellant's federal civil rights action.
• Layne v. Layne
  478 So. 2d 453· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-11-12 ·cited 6×
  Trial court lacked authority to order termination of AFDC benefits and reimbursement to the state; reversal required due to absence of proper pleadings and judicial lack of power over executive agency.
• Royster v. Fauver
  775 F.2d 527· 3d Cir.· 1985-10-18 ·cited 6×
  The application of the New Jersey Parole Act of 1979 to a prisoner who committed an offense in 1968 does not violate the ex post facto clause because the standards for parole eligibility are substantially similar to those in effect at the time of the offense, and the regulations
• Brown v. McGARR
  774 F.2d 777· 7th Cir.· 1985-10-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court's adoption of rules creating a trial bar did not deprive attorneys of property without due process of law, as it was a legislative-type rulemaking action, not a disbarment proceeding.
• Leber v. Smith
  773 F.2d 101· 6th Cir.· 1985-09-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court correctly granted summary judgment because the officer's actions, though resulting in injury, did not constitute a deprivation of constitutional rights under § 1983, especially given the availability of state remedies.
• Carter v. City OF Salina & the Salina City Council
  773 F.2d 251· 10th Cir.· 1985-09-03 ·cited 6×
  The court should not apply the 'clearly erroneous' standard of Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a) to review a district court's interpretation of state law.
• Reese v. Sparks
  760 F.2d 64· 3d Cir.· 1985-04-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that granting summary judgment without notice to the non-moving party and without resolving genuine issues of material fact is improper.
• Ford v. Louie L. Wainwright
  752 F.2d 526· 11th Cir.· 1985-01-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Florida statute for determining the sanity of a death row inmate meets minimum due process standards, and precedent binds the panel to affirm the denial of the petition.
• Gussie Davis v. Mansfield Metro. Hous. Auth.
  751 F.2d 180· 6th Cir.· 1984-12-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while procedural due process rights were violated by the housing authority's denial of hearings, the required hearings for initial applicants and program participants were less extensive than ordered by the trial court, and damages for mental suffering were no
• Thomas v. Brevard Cnty. Sheriff's Off. Civil Serv. Bd. & C.W. Miller
  456 So. 2d 540· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-09-20 ·cited 6×
  Kenneth Thomas, a deputy sheriff, was suspended and then terminated for insubordination after refusing to identify a person he contacted regarding a polygraph examination for another deputy. The Civil Service Board reduced the penalty to suspension, but the circuit court reversed
• Guerra v. DOE
  454 So. 2d 1· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-07-03 ·cited 6×
  Frank Guerra appeals the adoption of his biological child, arguing the trial court erred by denying him a hearing on whether his consent was required for adoption. The court held that Guerra, who timely filed an acknowledgment of paternity after learning of the adoption proceedin
• THE Florida BAR v. Furman
  451 So. 2d 808· Fla.· 1984-04-26 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court held Rosemary Furman in contempt for continuing to practice law without a license in violation of a prior injunction, despite her arguments that she was denied a jury trial and that the injunction was unclear. The Court sentenced her to 120 days' impriso
• Campbell v. Shearer
  732 F.2d 531· 6th Cir.· 1984-04-24 ·cited 6×
  A plaintiff must plead and prove that available state remedies are inadequate or systemically defective to state a claim for constitutional deprivation of property under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Hamilton Bank OF Johnson City v. Williamson Cnty. Reg'l Planning Comm'n
  729 F.2d 402· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the effects of the defendants' actions did not constitute a taking requiring compensation, and even a temporary deprivation of investment-backed expectations does not establish an entitlement to damages.
• Kidfield Hayes, Jr. v. Lt. H.P. Thompson
  726 F.2d 1015· 4th Cir.· 1984-02-10 ·cited 6×
  State prison regulations can create a liberty interest triggering due process protections if they use explicitly mandatory language and substantive predicates, overruling prior precedent that held otherwise.
• Smith v. Snow
  722 F.2d 630· 11th Cir.· 1983-12-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Georgia Parole Board's unfettered discretion in clemency proceedings means no constitutional right to procedural due process or Eighth Amendment protection against arbitrary application of the death penalty at this stage.
• Solis v. Schweiker
  719 F.2d 301· 9th Cir.· 1983-10-24 ·cited 6×
  A disability claimant is entitled to cross-examine a physician whose report is crucial to a nondisability finding if interrogatories are an inadequate substitute, and denial of this request violates procedural due process.
• Mahala Dockstader v. Miller
  719 F.2d 327· 10th Cir.· 1983-10-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court had mandamus jurisdiction to hear the case because the plaintiff sought procedural protections, not benefits, and that the erroneously paid benefits were not 'overpayments' under § 404, thus not triggering procedural protections or Fifth Ame
• Wendell P. Engelstad, M.D. v. Va. Mun. Hosp. & Va. Hosp. Comm'n
  718 F.2d 262· 8th Cir.· 1983-09-29 ·cited 6×
  A hospital director's position, based on an oral contract terminable at will, does not create a protectible property interest for due process purposes. Termination of such a directorship does not constitute a reduction or termination of staff privileges unless the privileges them
• Eldon E. Bell v. Sellevold
  713 F.2d 1396· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on his claims that his property or liberty interests were deprived without due process of law. The court also held that the distri
• Cruz v. Ferre
  571 F. Supp. 125· S.D. Fla.· 1983-08-02 ·cited 6×
  A city ordinance regulating 'indecent' material on cable television violates the First Amendment's free speech guarantee and its enforcement procedures violate due process.
• Blackhawk Mining Co., Inc. v. Andrus
  711 F.2d 753· 6th Cir.· 1983-07-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act's requirement of prepayment of proposed penalty assessments into escrow as a condition for formal review does not violate procedural due process under the Fifth Amendment.