Topic
Every decision we've filed under Civil Rights - Section 1983.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a civil rights lawsuit filed by Robert Lee Hale. The court held that the action was time-barred because the plaintiff failed to file within the applicable statute of limitations.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se plaintiff's civil rights lawsuit against state court officials. The court held that the claims were barred by judicial immunity and the applicable statute of limitations.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court's summary judgment in a civil rights action alleging Fourth Amendment violations. The panel held that the plaintiff failed to raise a genuine dispute regarding reasonable suspicion for detention and that the right to refuse identification was not clearly established.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se plaintiff's First Amendment claims against police officers and a municipality. The court held that the plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts to support claims of viewpoint discrimination or municipal liability for failure to train.
The Sixth Circuit reversed a district court ruling that denied qualified immunity to police officers involved in a struggle with a suspect. The court held that the officers did not violate any clearly established law when using force to subdue a suspect who actively resisted a frisk and attempted to flee.
The Seventh Circuit reversed a district court ruling that allowed a prisoner to sue detectives for exposing him to the risk of harm from other inmates. The court held that no clearly established constitutional right protects an inmate from such risk when no physical injury occurs.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se civil rights action brought by a state prisoner regarding his pretrial detention. The panel unanimously concluded that the district court properly dismissed claims for false arrest, judicial deception, equal protection violations, and municipal liability.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a civil rights action brought by a pro se appellant against state court officials and a county. The court held that judicial immunity and the Eleventh Amendment barred claims against the judges and commissioner, while the complaint failed to state a plausible claim against the county.
The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reversed the district court's denial of a motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to pursue prospective relief under Section nineteen eighty-three because they failed to allege a concrete and imminent injury.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Michael Townes's complaint seeking relief from civil disabilities arising from his federal conviction. The court held that Townes lacked Article III standing and that his claims were premature under the rule established in Heck v. Humphrey.