Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
17 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1980–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Judy Chang v. Purdue University, The Trustees of Purdue University Dr. France A. Cordova, President of Purdue University (in her official capacity)green2 sentences2020See also Chang v. Purdue Univ., 985 N.E.2d 35, 49 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (“[I]t is well settled that a state official may be sued in his or her official capacity for prospective relief such as an injunction for a violation of a person’s due process rights under § 1983.”), reh’g denied, trans. denied. [10] Crouch’s complaint requested the trial court to “[e]njoin the State from categorizing [him] or any other employee as not eligible for rehire without first providing that individual with notice and an opportunity to be heard.” Appellant’s Appendix Volume II at 11. 2017Further, “[a]lthough the Eleventh Amendment bars all claims against Purdue and the damages claims against its officials in their official capacities, it does not thwart the claims against the officials in their official capacities for the injunctive relief of reinstatement.” Kashani v. Purdue Univ., 813 F.2d 843, 848 (7th Cir. 1987), cert. denied; see also Chang v. Purdue Univ., 985 N.E.2d 35, 49 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (“[A] state official may be sued in his or her official capacity for prospective relief such as an injunction for a violation of a person’s due process rights under § 1983.”), tra | 2 | 2 |
Long v. Durnilgreen1 sentence2024Long v. Durnil, 697 N.E.2d 100, 105 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998), trans. denied. | 1 | 1 |
Hattie M. Trigg v. Fort Wayne Community Schoolsgreen1 sentence2017See Levin, 692 F.3d at 621-22 (“In light of our analysis of the ADEA and the relevant *887 case law, and given these divergent rights and protections, we conclude that the ADEA is not the .exclusive remedy for age discrimination in employment claims.”); Trigg v. Fort Wayne Cmty. Schs., 766 F.2d 299, 302 (7th Cir. 1986) .(“[A] discharged state employee’s right to sue under § 1983 for violations of the Equal ■ Protection Clause was well established before the passage of Title VII, and= the legislative history suggests that Congress intended that § 1983 would not be impliedly repealed in the empl | 1 | 1 |
Hamid R. Kashani v. Purdue Universitygreen1 sentence2017Further, “[a]lthough the Eleventh Amendment bars all claims against Purdue and the damages claims against its officials in their official capacities, it does not thwart the claims against the officials in their official capacities for the injunctive relief of reinstatement.” Kashani v. Purdue Univ., 813 F.2d 843, 848 (7th Cir. 1987), cert. denied; see also Chang v. Purdue Univ., 985 N.E.2d 35, 49 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (“[A] state official may be sued in his or her official capacity for prospective relief such as an injunction for a violation of a person’s due process rights under § 1983.”), tra | 1 | 1 |
Harvey Levin v. Lisa Madigangreen1 sentence2017See Levin, 692 F.3d at 621-22 (“In light of our analysis of the ADEA and the relevant *887 case law, and given these divergent rights and protections, we conclude that the ADEA is not the .exclusive remedy for age discrimination in employment claims.”); Trigg v. Fort Wayne Cmty. Schs., 766 F.2d 299, 302 (7th Cir. 1986) .(“[A] discharged state employee’s right to sue under § 1983 for violations of the Equal ■ Protection Clause was well established before the passage of Title VII, and= the legislative history suggests that Congress intended that § 1983 would not be impliedly repealed in the empl | 1 | 1 |
Maggert v. Callgreen1 sentence2015See Maggert v. Call, 817 N.E.2d 649, 651 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (holding that where Maggert’s civil action was for the theft of his property and not a challenge to his conviction or a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , Maggert had no federal constitutional right of access to the law library).3 3 May also directs us to 210 Ind. Admin. | 1 | 1 |
Ross v. Indiana State Board of Nursinggreen1 sentence2013See, e.g., Ross v. Ind. State Bd. Of Nursing, 790 N.E.2d 110 (Ind.Ct.App. 2003). | 1 | 1 |
Robert Lavoie v. James Bigwoodgreen1 sentence1998Where the plaintiffs are alleging that the defendant denied them their “rights of free speech and association guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment as it incorporates the First Amendment, the deprivation must take the form of ‘state action.’ ” Lavoie v. Bigwood, 457 F.2d 7, 9 (1st Cir.1972). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Will v. Michigan Department of State Police
green
2 sentences1998Whether a governmental entity is amenable to suit under that provision depends on the meaning of the term "person." The U.S. Supreme Court has held that for § 1983 purposes that term does not include a state or its administrative agencies, Will v. Michigan Dep't of State Police , 491 U.S. 58 (1989). 1997Whether a governmental entity is amenable to suit under that provision depends on the meaning of the term "person." The U.S. Supreme Court has held that for § 1983 purposes that term does not include a state or its administrative agencies, Will v. Michigan Dep't of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 , 109 S.Ct. 2304 , 105 L.Ed.2d 45 (1989). | 3 | 1997–1998 |
Ramco Industries, Inc. v. C & E Corp.
green
1 sentence2020To be properly certifiable as a final judgment, the trial court’s order must “possess the requisite degree of finality, and must dispose of at least a single substantive claim.” Id. [12] Appellants’ October 26, 2018, amended complaint alleged all named defendants either individually or in concert violated Appellants’ rights under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 and 18 U.S.C. section 241 ; committed several conspiracies, false reporting, false arrest and imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, false light, and defamation per se; and violated Appellants’ “fundamental right to familial | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Lush v. Commissioner of Education of New York
green
1 sentence2011In Monroe v. Pape, 366 U.S. 167, 171-72 , 81 S.Ct. 473 , 5 L.Ed.2d 492 (1961), the Court interpreted “under color of’ state or local law to apply to conduct by a state or local official in accordance with state or local law, in violation of state or local law, or even where state or local law is silent. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Monroe v. Pape
red
2 sentences2011In Monroe v. Pape, 366 U.S. 167, 171-72 , 81 S.Ct. 473 , 5 L.Ed.2d 492 (1961), the Court interpreted “under color of’ state or local law to apply to conduct by a state or local official in accordance with state or local law, in violation of state or local law, or even where state or local law is silent. 2011In Monroe v. Pape, 366 U.S. 167, 171-72 , 81 S.Ct. 473 , 5 L.Ed.2d 492 (1961), the Court interpreted “under color of’ state or local law to apply to conduct by a state or local official in accordance with state or local law, in violation of state or local law, or even where state or local law is silent. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Roob v. Fisher
green
1 sentence2007Roob v. Fisher, 856 N.E.2d 723 (Ind.Ct.App.2006). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Gonzaga University v. Doe
green
2 sentences2003In Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 , 122 S.Ct. 2268 , 158 L.Ed.2d 309 (2002), the United States Supreme Court held that FERPA's non-disclosure provisions create no personal right to enforce pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . 2003In Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 , 122 S.Ct. 2268 , 158 L.Ed.2d 309 (2002), the United States Supreme Court held that FERPA's non-disclosure provisions create no personal right to enforce pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
West v. Atkins
green
2 sentences1998In order to maintain a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , “a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.” West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 , 108 S.Ct. 2250, 2254-55 , 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988). 1998In order to maintain a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , “a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.” West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 , 108 S.Ct. 2250, 2254-55 , 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Perry v. Sindermann
red
2 sentences1995Perry v. Sindermann (1972), 408 U.S. 593 , 92 S.Ct. 2694 , 33 L.Ed.2d 570 ; Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth (1972), 408 U.S. 564 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 . 1995Perry v. Sindermann (1972), 408 U.S. 593 , 92 S.Ct. 2694 , 33 L.Ed.2d 570 ; Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth (1972), 408 U.S. 564 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth
green
2 sentences1995Perry v. Sindermann (1972), 408 U.S. 593 , 92 S.Ct. 2694 , 33 L.Ed.2d 570 ; Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth (1972), 408 U.S. 564 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 . 1995Perry v. Sindermann (1972), 408 U.S. 593 , 92 S.Ct. 2694 , 33 L.Ed.2d 570 ; Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth (1972), 408 U.S. 564 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
State v. Hall
green
1 sentence1982The Court of Appeals, Fourth District, affirmed the judgment of the trial court by opinion published at 411 N.E.2d 366 . | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Lawrence J. Holt v. Robert Sarver, Commissioner of Corrections
green
2 sentences1980Jones v. Metzger (6th Cir. 1972), 456 F.2d 854 ; Holt v. Sarver (E.D.Ark.1970), 309 F.Supp. 362 , aff’d (8th Cir. 1971), 442 F.2d 304 , where § 1983 actions were brought in federal court to contest the insufficient facilities in the local penal system. 1980Jones v. Metzger (6th Cir.1972), 456 F.2d 854 ; Holt v. Sarver (E.D.Ark. 1970), 309 F. Supp. 362 , aff'd (8th Cir.1971), 442 F.2d 304 , where § 1983 actions were brought in federal court to contest the insufficient facilities in the local penal system. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Charles Jones v. William Metzger, Homer Roberts
green
2 sentences1980Jones v. Metzger (6th Cir. 1972), 456 F.2d 854 ; Holt v. Sarver (E.D.Ark.1970), 309 F.Supp. 362 , aff’d (8th Cir. 1971), 442 F.2d 304 , where § 1983 actions were brought in federal court to contest the insufficient facilities in the local penal system. 1980Jones v. Metzger (6th Cir.1972), 456 F.2d 854 ; Holt v. Sarver (E.D.Ark. 1970), 309 F. Supp. 362 , aff'd (8th Cir.1971), 442 F.2d 304 , where § 1983 actions were brought in federal court to contest the insufficient facilities in the local penal system. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Holt v. Sarver
green
2 sentences1980Jones v. Metzger (6th Cir. 1972), 456 F.2d 854 ; Holt v. Sarver (E.D.Ark.1970), 309 F.Supp. 362 , aff’d (8th Cir. 1971), 442 F.2d 304 , where § 1983 actions were brought in federal court to contest the insufficient facilities in the local penal system. 1980Jones v. Metzger (6th Cir.1972), 456 F.2d 854 ; Holt v. Sarver (E.D.Ark. 1970), 309 F. Supp. 362 , aff'd (8th Cir.1971), 442 F.2d 304 , where § 1983 actions were brought in federal court to contest the insufficient facilities in the local penal system. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Pruitt v. Joiner
green
2 sentences1980Just recently in Pruitt v. Joiner (1979), Ind. App., 395 N.E.2d 276 , this court held that where inmates do not challenge the legality of their custody but only the conditions of detention, the course to pursue is either a writ of mandate or prohibition or a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in either a state or federal court. 11 See also Jones v. Wittenburg (N.D.Ohio 1971), 323 F.Supp. 93 , aff’d sub nom. 1980Just recently in Pruitt v. Joiner (1979), Ind. App., 395 N.E.2d 276 , this court held that where inmates do not challenge the legality of their custody but only the conditions of detention, the course to pursue is either a writ of mandate or prohibition or a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in either a state or federal court. [11] See also *827 Jones v. Wittenburg (N.D.Ohio 1971), 323 F. Supp. 93 , aff'd sub nom. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Jones v. Wittenberg
green
2 sentences1980Just recently in Pruitt v. Joiner (1979), Ind. App., 395 N.E.2d 276 , this court held that where inmates do not challenge the legality of their custody but only the conditions of detention, the course to pursue is either a writ of mandate or prohibition or a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in either a state or federal court. 11 See also Jones v. Wittenburg (N.D.Ohio 1971), 323 F.Supp. 93 , aff’d sub nom. 1980Just recently in Pruitt v. Joiner (1979), Ind. App., 395 N.E.2d 276 , this court held that where inmates do not challenge the legality of their custody but only the conditions of detention, the course to pursue is either a writ of mandate or prohibition or a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in either a state or federal court. [11] See also *827 Jones v. Wittenburg (N.D.Ohio 1971), 323 F. Supp. 93 , aff'd sub nom. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.