My Crossword Maker Logo
Powered by BrightSprout
Save Status:
or to save your progress. The page will not refresh.
Controls:
SPACEBAR SWITCHES TYPING DIRECTION
Answer Key:
Edit a Copy:
Make Your Own:
Crucigrama Sopa de Letras Hoja de Trabajo
Calificar este Puzzle:
Log in or sign up to rate this puzzle.

Civil Rights Litigation

Created by: Devon Shaw 
CIvil Rights Litigation - Current Issues 
Professor Ricks 
Spring 2025
Horizontales
Claims that police have used excessive force in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other seizure are analyzed by asking whether the officers' actions are objectively reasonable
To prove an excessive force claim a pre trial detainee only has to show that an officers excessive force was objectively unreasonable (amendment)
Overruling part of the Monroe holding, the Supreme Court held that municipalities are subject to §1983 liability when the violation of federal rights is caused by enforcement of a municipal policy or custom
The court held in this case that the 8th amendments ban on cruel and unusual punishment prohibits deliberate indifference to serious medical needs of convicted prisoners. The government has an obligation to provide medical care to prisoners because if they won't, who else is going to and the infliction of unnecessary suffering is inconsistent with contemporary standards of decency.
This case was a creative attempt to litigate around Substantive Due Process outlined by DeShaney. This was an unsuccessful attempt to expand the property protected by procedural due process to include Domestic violence victims' entitlement to enforce a restraining order.
After the Kingsley holding, this amendment is used to govern pre-trial detention and gives rise to due process.
This case evaluated the state created danger exception and held that an officer could not be held liable for creating the danger that plaintiff would be shot where the officer loaned a gun to a confidential informant who had a dispute with plaintiff and the informant shot the plaintiff.
Case holding that executive action violates substantive due process only when it is arbitrary or conscience shocking in a constitutional sense, also known as the shocks the conscience standard
In this case regarding a prison riot, the court says they must use the malicious and sadistic for the very purpose of causing harm standard, contrasted with a good faith effort. The court found that it is only cruel and unusual punishment if it is unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain. The infliction of pain alone does not violate the 8th amendment.
Prohibits cruel and unusual punishment of a person convicted of a crime (amendment).
This case decided the circuit split that lasted about 24 yrs about whether officers needed to subjectively intend to inflict excessive force for a 14th amendment claim. The court held that to prove an excessive force claim, a pre-trial detainee only has to show that an officer's excessive force was objectively unreasonable under the fourth amendment.
Verticales
Deadly force may not be used unless it is necessary to prevent escape, and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious injury to the officer or others
SCOTUS held §1983 to provide a remedy for violations of federal constitutional rights even if the conduct complained of also violated state law and created a state cause of action as well. There is no requirement that you exhaust your state remedy before you bring your federal claim
The court held here that negligent conduct by state officials without a corresponding deliberate decision making does not deprive a person of life, liberty, or property under the 14th amendment due process clause.
Case setting a standard for Deliberate indifference to mean that the defendant subjectively appreciated the risk of harm to the plaintiff and deliberately disregarded it; It is more than negligence, but less than intentionally causing harm.
In this case, the court applied the Farmer standard in a situation involving the plaintiff being attacked by prison gang members. The court held that under the eighth amendment, a duty of prison officials is to protect prisoners from violence at the hands of other prisoners.
The Daniels Court distinguished this type of due process by describing it, by barring certain government actions regardless of the fairness of the procedures used to impose them. [due process] serves to prevent governmental power from being used for purposes of oppression.
A case applying the Lewis standard regarding a plaintiff's deprivation of liberty interests in his bodily integrity when he was rendered a quadriplegic by treatment of paramedics.
This case was evaluated using the four elements outlined by the Mark court for applying the state created danger theory and the court held that a police officer could be found liable for creating a danger that a drunken woman would not arrive home safely where the officer stopped a drunken couple on the street in the winter and allowed her husband to leave.
The Daniels Court distinguished this type of due process by describing it "by requiring the government to follow appropriate procedures when its agents decide to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property the Due Process Clause promotes fairness in such decisions".
The court here decided that a professor's due process rights were not violated because the state law did not create any entitlement to re-employment, and because their was not entitled expectation there was no genuine no property interest deprived of, holding that He must have more than an expectation, must have a legitimate claim of entitlement upon which someone relies on in their daily lives.
Case holding that the State owes no duty to protect a person from harm inflicted by private actors, other than for two exceptions: state created danger or special relationship.
The court in this case decided during the midst of the circuit split decided that post arrest, pre-detainees' claims should be analyzed under the fourth amendment. This court called the time between arrest and sentencing a twilight zone.