Justia Civil Rights Opinion Summaries

Articles Posted in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
by
Plaintiff filed suit against defendants under 42 U.S.C. 1983, alleging civil rights violations because the police issued an “Official Notification of Trespass Warning” prohibiting her from entering city-owned property, which was later lifted. The district court concluded that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity as to the majority of plaintiff's claims, but denied qualified immunity on the procedural due process and direct municipal liability claims. Defendants appealed the denial of qualified immunity.The court reversed and remanded, concluding that the alleged constitutional right was not clearly established at the time of the incident, so the officers are entitled to qualified immunity. View "Vincent v. City of Sulphur" on Justia Law

by
Plaintiffs filed suit against the school district and its employees, alleging claims related to the sexual molestation of A.W. by her teacher. The district court dismissed the claims under Rule 12(b)(6) as time-barred. At issue is the Texas statute of limitations that applies to Title IX of the Education Act of 1972, 20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and 42 U.S.C. 1983 claims involving sexual abuse. The court concluded that the district court did not err in finding that plaintiffs’ Title IX and section 1983 claims are time-barred because plaintiffs' claims accrued more than two years prior to their filing suit and the equitable tolling principles they have identified do not apply. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment and did not reach the remaining issues raised on appeal. View "King-White v. Humble Indep. Sch. Dist." on Justia Law

by
Plaintiffs filed suit under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000d, and 42 U.S.C. 1983 against the district and two district employee, alleging discrimination based on race and a hostile educational work environment. The court applied the deliberate indifference standard for a Title VI student-on-student harassment claim and concluded that plaintiffs have raised a genuine dispute that a racially hostile environment existed. However, the court concluded that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment on the Title VI claim where plaintiffs have failed to raise a genuine dispute over whether the school district was deliberately indifferent to the harassment. Further, the court concluded that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment as to the claim against the school district and the employees under section 1983. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment. View "Fennell v. Marion I.S.D." on Justia Law