Preparing Your Child for College: A Resource Book for ParentsDIANE Publishing, 2001 - 59 pages |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 22
Page iii
... v . Thiboutot : " Plain Language " Approach 43 Defining the Limits of " And Laws " Actions 43 Enforceable Rights 44 Wilder and Suter Synthesized 48 SECTION 1983 LITIGATION Comprehensive Scheme : Congress's Intent to Foreclose iii.
... v . Thiboutot : " Plain Language " Approach 43 Defining the Limits of " And Laws " Actions 43 Enforceable Rights 44 Wilder and Suter Synthesized 48 SECTION 1983 LITIGATION Comprehensive Scheme : Congress's Intent to Foreclose iii.
Page iv
A Resource Book for Parents Dan Morrissey. SECTION 1983 LITIGATION Comprehensive Scheme : Congress's Intent to Foreclose 49 Chapter 5 : Governmental and Supervisory Liability 51 State Liability : Eleventh Amendment Immunity and Status as ...
A Resource Book for Parents Dan Morrissey. SECTION 1983 LITIGATION Comprehensive Scheme : Congress's Intent to Foreclose 49 Chapter 5 : Governmental and Supervisory Liability 51 State Liability : Eleventh Amendment Immunity and Status as ...
Page 1
... Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.1 Litigating under this statute is complex . Through the years , the Su- preme Court has been able to interpret ...
... Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.1 Litigating under this statute is complex . Through the years , the Su- preme Court has been able to interpret ...
Page 2
... Congress passed 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in 1871 as section 1 of the " Ku Klux Klan Act . " The statute did not emerge as a tool for checking the abuse by state officials , however , until 1961 , when the Supreme Court decided Monroe v . Pape.3 ...
... Congress passed 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in 1871 as section 1 of the " Ku Klux Klan Act . " The statute did not emerge as a tool for checking the abuse by state officials , however , until 1961 , when the Supreme Court decided Monroe v . Pape.3 ...
Page 3
... Congress providing for equal rights of citizens or of all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States . 7. 28 U.S.C. § 1331 ( 1993 ) provides that " district courts shall have original jurisdic- tion of all civil actions ...
... Congress providing for equal rights of citizens or of all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States . 7. 28 U.S.C. § 1331 ( 1993 ) provides that " district courts shall have original jurisdic- tion of all civil actions ...
Common terms and phrases
11th Cir 2d Cir 7th Cir absolute immunity Abstention Doctrines act under color affirmative alleged appellate court applied authority award cert challenged action cial City clearly established color of law Colorado River concurring conduct Congress constitutional rights constitutional violation County of Sacramento Court of Appeals created criminal custody decision declaratory defendant deliberate indifference Dep't deprivation DeShaney determining dismiss Dist district court doctrine dormant commerce clause due process clause Eighth Amendment Eleventh Amendment employees enforcement entity facts failure to train federal court Fourteenth Amendment Fourth Amendment functions governmental heightened pleading injunctive relief injury issue Judge jurisdiction jury Justice legislative liberty interest Monell municipal liability offi official's Pembaur person plaintiff police officers preclusion proceedings prosecutor punitive damages qualified immunity question reasonable remedy requires SECTION 1983 LITIGATION Sheriff standard state's statute substantive due process suit summary judgment supervisory liability Supp Supreme Court held Suter tion
Popular passages
Page 3 - To redress the deprivation, under color of any State law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage, of any right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution of the United States...
Page 16 - First, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.
Page 95 - CRIMES," for the protection of all persons in the United States in their civil rights, and for their vindication, shall be exercised and enforced in conformity with the laws of the United States...
Page 103 - It is of course conceivable that a statute might be flagrantly and patently violative of express constitutional prohibitions in every clause, sentence and paragraph, and in whatever manner and against whomever an effort might be made to apply it.
Page 55 - Local governing bodies, therefore, can be sued directly under § 1983 for monetary, declaratory, or injunctive relief where, as here, the action that is alleged to be unconstitutional implements or executes a policy statement, ordinance, regulation, or decision officially adopted and promulgated by that body's officers.
Page 95 - ... the common law, as modified and changed by the constitution and statutes of the State wherein the court having jurisdiction of such civil or criminal cause is held, so far as the same is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States...
Page 115 - The district courts shall not enjoin, suspend or restrain the assessment, levy or collection of any tax under State law where a plain, speedy and efficient remedy may be had in the courts of such State.
Page 103 - A court of the United States may not grant an injunction to stay proceedings in a State court except as expressly authorized by Act of Congress, or where necessary in aid of its jurisdiction, or to protect or effectuate its judgments.
Page 9 - Our cases [have] insisted that the conduct allegedly causing the deprivation of a federal right be fairly attributable to the state. These cases reflect a two-part approach to this question of 'fair attribution'. First, the deprivation must be caused by the exercise of some right or privilege created by the state or by a rule of conduct imposed by the state or by a person for whom the state is responsible.
Page 3 - ... that are so related to claims in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution.