Topic
Every decision we've filed under Civil Rights - Section 1983.
The Seventh Circuit reversed a district court's grant of summary judgment in a prisoner civil rights case, holding that the plaintiff properly exhausted administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The court affirmed the denial of class certification but remanded the Eighth Amendment claim for trial.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of a Section 1983 complaint filed against a private security employee and a county deputy. The court found no reversible error in the lower court's ruling and dispensed with oral argument due to the sufficiency of the written record.
The Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal because the appellant filed his notice of appeal well past the mandatory 30-day deadline. The court affirmed the district court's separate order denying the appellant's motion to remand the case to state court.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se civil rights lawsuit brought against Maryland state officials and entities. The court upheld the lower court's ruling based on sovereign immunity, failure to state a claim, and the plaintiff's refusal to amend her complaint to sue the Sheriff in his individual capacity.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Willie Good's race discrimination and retaliation claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. The appellate court found no reversible error in the lower court's ruling and determined that oral argument was unnecessary.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment on the plaintiff's federal civil rights claims and its order remanding state law claims to state court. The court found no reversible error in the lower court's proceedings and addressed several procedural motions regarding the appellant's informal brief and request for counsel.
The Fourth Circuit vacated a district court's denial of a Rule 60(b) motion because the lower court raised the timeliness issue on its own without giving the plaintiff notice. While the court agreed that the one-year deadline applied, it held that timeliness is an affirmative defense that must be raised by the opposing party.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Jose Martin Argueta's pro se civil rights complaint without prejudice. The court found no reversible error in the lower court's decision to dismiss the case without issuing or serving process under the in forma pauperis statutes.
The Fourth Circuit remanded a pro se civil rights appeal because the notice of appeal was filed after the mandatory 30-day deadline expired. The court treated the appellant's letters as a motion to reopen the appeal period and sent the case back to the district court to determine if the deadline should be extended.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a prisoner's substantive due process claim, holding that his allegations failed to state a plausible violation of constitutional rights. The court reiterated that government conduct must shock the conscience or interfere with rights implicit in ordered liberty to constitute a substantive due process violation.