Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

new - employment > 1983 > Flashcards

1983 Flashcards

1
Q

Who applies?

A

#s LEAD Aging for all of us.
———–
1981, 1983, 1985
flSa
ePa
ADa (pub serv) [emp = 15+]
ADEA

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Who does it not apply to?

A

1983 Officially sets you free.
———–
No private persons, Officials acting under color.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What’s UNIQUE about 1983?

A

1983 our policy free & no responde a-yee!
———–
(a) It’s the door opener for all const. claims.
(b) Allow suit against officials only - ‘color of law’ (no private indivs).
(c) No respondeat superior.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

S/L

A

4 yrs.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Can you sue individs?

A

1983 Officially sets you free.
———–
Yes, officials acting under color of law. (not private persons).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What’s 3 UNIQUE things about 1983?

A

  1. Only Officials acting under color of law.
  2. Official’s act (its custom/policy) = cz.
  3. No respondent superior (can’t sue b/c LG employed a discriminator.)

~confirmed.
– No Resp Sup. Why? b/c sue only for custom or policy (focus on the entity).
– Only sue individs in their official capacity.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

4 elements to establish prima facie case.

A

1983 = 4 x C = Const, Color, Custom, Cz
———–
1. Deprived rt secured by Const or Fed Law.
2. Under color of law.
3. In furtherance of a custom or policy.
4. LG official’s act must be cz of the harm.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

To be actionable, how many acts in furtherance of custom or policy are required?

A

A single instance is sufficient if done by indiv w/ policy making pwr.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

State 2 defenses.

A

Absolute + Qualified Immunity.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is absolute immunity?

A

  1. BCC acting in legis. But not decisions affecting individs, ex. employ
  2. Judicial + prosecutor acting in capacity immune for damages but not injunct.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is qualified immunity?

A

Immune if:
1. Performing discretionary function &
2. No reas person wd have known action unlawful, i.e., not so blatant a reas competent official wd have known.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

How is qual imm more than a defense?

A

It’s a right to be free of suit Ʃ immediately appealable.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

How PL can get dismissed?

A

Must exhaust State remedies.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

How do you exhaust your State remedies?

A

If you have a claim under a State law, file there. Fed court wants only Federal constitution claims.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Bottom line use of 1983.

A

  1. Against Officials & LGs for custom or policy.
  2. As door opener for 1981 + other const. claim.
  3. LEO failure to train via custom/policy.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What damages are available?

A

  1. Punis vs. Officials (not LGs).
  2. ## JEFF’s Lost Benes (jury, equit, front/back, fees, lost benes)Just like 1981.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

How determine LEO force excessive?

A

Consider severity of the crime, threat, resistance, flight,
the relationship between the need and amount of force used, and the extent of the injury inflicted.

18
Q

What amendment is often seen in LEO claims?

A

4th amendment.

19
Q

When is LEO denied qualified immunity?

A

Gratuitous & excessive force against a passive, controlled, obedient suspect.

20
Q

What is acknowledged about any arrest?

A

Inherently involves some degree of physical coercion or threat.
De minimis force = qualified immunity.

21
Q

What is the purpose of 1983?

A

It’s true service is to allow an individ to sue a govt for a deprivation of constitutionally protected rts.

22
Q

What are the 2 elements of 1983?

A

1) Someone acting under color of law.
2) Deprived you of a constitutional right.

23
Q

What damages are available in 1983 claim?

A

  1. Punis vs. Official acting under color.
  2. Actual expenses/dmgs only.
    Why?
    Jury cannot place a dollar value on a constitutional right.
24
Q

What rights does 1983 protect?

A

None. It is not a source of rights.
It is a channel to enforce rts found elsewhere.

25
Q

Why is it sometimes confusing that 1983 itself is a cause of action?

A

#1 - It has elements. Color of law, deprived rts.
#2 - It procedurally is stand alone, i.e., no need to comply w/ FS 768.28.

26
Q

Is 1983 a stand alone claim?

A

No, not substantively.
—
Procedurally it is stand alone such that there is no need to first comply w/ FS 768.28 which requires a trial court to find an evidentiary basis for a punitive dmgs claim.

27
Q

What other theories of recovery offer 1983’s damages?

A

All #s + A.M. ALE
———–
1981, 1983, 1985
[A.M. ALE - drinking in the a.m.? that’s a lot of liquid]
Adea
fMla (3 yrs) + interest
Ada
fLsa (3 yrs)
Epa (3 yrs)

28
Q

Can LG get AF in 1983?

A

Only is shown to be frivolous, unreasonable or without foundation.

29
Q

How show you have standing to sue for civil rights?

A

Standing in Concrete makes u Re-Dress.
———–
Suffered an injury or invasion of a legally protected interest that is concrete & particularized.

30
Q

We know 5th & 14th amends prohibit deprivation of life, liberty & property w/o due process of law.

What are the 2 ways courts have interpreted this?

A

1) Procedural DP
2) Substantive DP

31
Q

What is substantive dp?

A

Protection of “fundamental” rights. Rights implicit in liberty.
Ex. 1st Amendment, Unreas search & seizure

32
Q

Re: subst. dp
Can govt officials be sued in their private capacity or official?

A

Either.
A suit in official capacity is a suit vs. LG. May get dismissed b/c redundant w/ claims vs. LG.

33
Q

To maintain 1983 vs. LG, what must be established?

A

violation of constitutional rts from custom or policy.
———–
Not from respondeat superior. LG can’t be held liab solely by virtue of the employment relationship w/ the offender.

34
Q

-describe the acts for which LG is liable.

A

Liab is limited to acts that are properly speaking, acts of LG. I.E., acts which LG has officially sanctioned or ordered.

35
Q

– who makes the custom or policy?

A

Final policy-making authority decision maker or legis body.

36
Q

Who is immune?

A

ABSOLUTE (LEGISLATIVE) IMMUNITY
—
Local legislators, city commissioners, are absolutely immune from suit for their legislative activities.

Ask yourself - is the act complained of part of the legis process? Ex. passing resolution.

37
Q

What types of immunity are available to public officials?

A

Absolute - legislative immunity (passing a resolution)
Qualified immunity - discretionary.

38
Q

How prove qualified immunity?

A

1) Acting w/i scope of discretionary authrority.
2) Was not a violation of a clearly established law.

39
Q

What did the

A
40
Q

Once & for all -
Can a private individual be sued under 42 USC 1983?

A

YES - if acted under color of law.
ME- the indiv HAS TO BE NAMED INDIVIDUALLY b/c if name in official capacity it is a suit vs. LG.
If sue LG & indiv in official capacity = redundant .
———–
Foshee v. Health Management

new - employment (20 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions