federal civil rights claim in Alabama

2015The circuit court in the present case determined that Johnson’s claims were “ ‘frivolous, unreasonable or groundless.’ ” In Shepherd , the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals stated: “Standards for assessing whether a federal civil-rights claim is frivolous, under the principles of Chrlstiansburg, were set out in Sullivan v. School Board of Pinellas County, 773 F.2d 1182 (11th Cir.1985).

2000Standards for assessing whether a federal civil-rights claim is frivolous, under the principles of Christianburg , were set out in Sullivan v. School Board of Pinellas County , 773 F.2d 1182 (11th Cir. 1985).

2007They are available `"where [the] Court enters judgment in favor of a plaintiff on [the pendent] state law claim,'" rather than on the federal civil-rights claim, "`as long as both claims arise out of a common nucleus of operative fact.'" Davis , 443 So.2d at 1235 (quoting trial court's order).

2005In Montanez v. QuestCare, Inc., 675 So.2d 466 (Ala.Civ.App.1996), we affirmed a summary judgment against prison medical-care providers on a prisoner's state-law medical-malpractice claim based upon the prisoner's failure to adduce expert evidence from similarly situated health-care providers of a breach of the applicable standard of medical care.

2005NOTES [1] Article I, § 14, Ala. Const.1901, provides that "the State of Alabama shall never be made a defendant in any court of law or equity." [2] As our supreme court stated in Alabama Dep't of Corr. v. Thompson, 855 So.2d 1016, 1020 (Ala.2003): "` Ex parte Cranman, 792 So.2d 392 (Ala. 2000), recounts the evolution of State-agent immunity. . .,' Ex parte Rizk, 791 So.2d [911,] 913 [(Ala.2000)], and restates the law on that topic: "`We therefore restate the rule governing State-agent immunity: "`A State agent shall be immune from civil liability in his or her personal capacity when the conduc

1998College , 683 So.2d 426 (Ala.Civ.App. 1995) (" Smith I "), cert. denied , ___ U.S. ___, 117 S.Ct. 1426 , 137 L.Ed.2d 536 (1997), in which the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal, on the basis of issue preclusion, of a federal civil rights claim of a professor against three school administrators based upon an allegedly wrongful termination of his employment where he had failed to take an appeal, pursuant to the AAPA, from the decision of an administrative review panel upholding his termination.

1998College , 683 So.2d 426 (Ala.Civ.App. 1995) (" Smith I "), cert. denied , ___ U.S. ___, 117 S.Ct. 1426 , 137 L.Ed.2d 536 (1997), in which the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal, on the basis of issue preclusion, of a federal civil rights claim of a professor against three school administrators based upon an allegedly wrongful termination of his employment where he had failed to take an appeal, pursuant to the AAPA, from the decision of an administrative review panel upholding his termination.

1998College , 683 So.2d 426 (Ala.Civ.App. 1995) (" Smith I "), cert. denied , ___ U.S. ___, 117 S.Ct. 1426 , 137 L.Ed.2d 536 (1997), in which the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal, on the basis of issue preclusion, of a federal civil rights claim of a professor against three school administrators based upon an allegedly wrongful termination of his employment where he had failed to take an appeal, pursuant to the AAPA, from the decision of an administrative review panel upholding his termination.