42 U.S.C. § 1983

Section 1983 provides a procedure for redress when a person acting under color of state law deprives another of a constitutional or federal statutory right.

Forney v. Forney · filed 2015-03-30

To maintain a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show that the defendant, acting under col- or of state law, denied the plaintiff a con.stitutional or federal statutory right.

Section 1983 provides a cause of action for violations of federal constitutional or statutory rights by persons acting under color of state law.

Barrett v. Premo · filed 2015-03-30

To prevail on a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of evidence (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a constitutional or federal right violation committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Johnston v. University of Pittsburgh of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education · filed 2015-03-31

To state a claim for relief under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege both the violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a claim to allege conduct under color of state law that deprived a person of a federally protected right.

Dos Republicas Coal Partnership v. David Saucedo, as Floodplain Administrator and County Judge of the Maverick County Co · filed 2015-04-02

A claim under section 1983 must allege two essential elements: (1) the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state *659 law, and (2) the conduct deprived a person of a federally protected right.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Bey v. City of Tampa Code Enforcement · filed 2015-04-08

To state a claim for relief under § 1983, the plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to establish that (1) she was deprived of a federal right (2) by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to identify a federally secured right, its deprivation, and a person acting under color of state law.

Doe v. DeWine · filed 2015-04-15

To establish a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must “identify a right secured by the United States Constitution and deprivation of that' right by a person acting under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show deprivation of a constitutional or statutory right under color of state law.

Shorter v. Baca · filed 2015-04-21

To prove a violation under § 1983, Plaintiff must show that: (1) Defendants conduct deprived Plaintiff of a right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and (2) Defendants committed the act under color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988).

Section 1983 requires plaintiffs to show that the defendant acted under color of state law and deprived them of federal rights.

Wagner v. Holtzapple · filed 2015-04-23

In order for plaintiffs to prevail under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, they must establish two elements: first, that the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and second, that the conduct deprived the plaintiff of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or federal law.

Parker v. Austin · filed 2015-04-28

Indeed, in order to state a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must allege a violation of a “right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States” which plaintiffs have not done in Count Five.

Section 1983 lets private parties enforce federal rights against persons who violate those rights under color of state law, requiring action under color of state law and deprivation of a constitutional right.

Ashokkumar v. Dwyer · filed 2015-05-04

Under Title 42, United States Code, Section 1983, private parties may enforce federal rights against those whom violate those rights under color of state law. 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The essential elements of a constitutional claim under § 1983 are: (1) the defendant acted under color of state law, and (2) that the alleged wrongful conduct deprived the plaintiff of a constitutionally protected right.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a constitutional or statutory right violation caused by a person acting under color of state law.

Brown v. City of Saltillo · filed 2015-05-07

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must [1] allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and [2] must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Hoy v. Yamhill County · filed 2015-05-08

“To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must both (1) allege the deprivation of a right secured by the federal Constitution or statutory law, and (2) allege that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show action under color of state law and deprivation of a constitutional or federal right.

Xiong v. Fischer · filed 2015-05-18

Suits under § 1983 are meant to deter state actors from using the “color of state law” to deprive individuals of rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Fries v. Helsper, 146 F.3d 452, 457 (7th Cir. 1998). Thus, in order to bring a claim under this section, the plaintiff must show two elements: (1) the party against whom the claim is brought qualifies as a “person acting under the color of state law”; and (2) the conduct alleged amounted to a deprivation of rights, privileges, or immunities under the Constitution or the laws of the United States.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show that a person acting under color of state law deprived him of a constitutional or federal right.

Jerry Moore, Sr. v. Wesbanco Bank, Inc. · filed 2015-05-21

In order to prevail on a claim brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show that a person acting under color of state law deprived him of a right secured by the U.S. Constitution or a federal law.

Section 1983 allows a plaintiff to seek redress for deprivation of constitutional rights by a person acting under color of state law and requires proof of deprivation, state action, proximate causation, and damages.

John Baker and Valerie Baker v. City of Iowa City, Iowa and Iowa City Human Rights Commission · filed 2015-05-22

To be successful on a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim a plaintiff must show (1) that the defendant deprived the plaintiff of a right secured by the constitution and laws of the United States, (2) that the defendant acted under color of state law, (3) that the conduct was a proximate cause of the plaintiff’s damage, and (4) the amount of damages. Leydens v. City of Des Moines, 484 N.W.2d 594, 596 (Iowa 1992).

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a constitutional or statutory deprivation committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Dorato v. Smith · filed 2015-05-26

To state a claim under § 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.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege state action and a violation of constitutional rights.

Bodmann v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. · filed 2015-05-27

Upon review, we conclude that the District Court properly dismissed Appellants’ claims because they failed to allege either state action or a violation of their constitutional rights.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show deprivation of a federally secured right by a person acting under color of state law.

Diaz-Garcia v. Surillo-Ruiz · filed 2015-06-23

To make out a viable section 1983 claim, a plaintiff must show that: (1) a person deprived her of a federally secured right; and (2) the perpetrator acted under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to establish that a person acting under color of law deprived them of a right secured by federal law.

Lumpkins v. Office of Community Devel, et · filed 2015-07-16

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Lumpkins must establish that a person, acting under color of law, deprived her of “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws” of the United States.

Section 1983 provides a civil action for constitutional deprivations caused by a person acting under color of state law.

Butcher v. South Shore Hospital · filed 2015-11-13

Notwithstanding her reference to § 1983, Butcher cannot plausibly state any claim under the Constitution or federal law because “conduct which merely engenders common law tort liability, without infringing on constitutionally protected interests, is not a sufficient basis to support a cause of action under Section 1983.” ... Furthermore, as a private actor not acting under color of state law, South Shore is not liable under § 1983, see Hallinan v. Fraternal Order of Police of Chi. Lodge No. 7, 570 F.3d 811, 815 (7th Cir. 2009).

Section 1983 provides a civil remedy for deprivations of federally protected rights caused by persons acting under color of state law.

G.L. Kretchmar v. PA DOC and D. Russell · filed 2015-11-16

Section 1983 provides a civil remedy for deprivations of federally protected rights caused by persons acting under color of state law. ... In any section 1983 action, the initial inquiry must focus on the presence of two essential elements: whether the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and whether this conduct deprived a person of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show deprivation of a constitutional right by a defendant acting under color of state law.

Braun v. Terry · filed 2015-11-30

“To state a claim under § 1983, the [plaintiff] must demonstrate that the defendant deprived him of a right secured by the Constitution and that in doing so the defendant acted under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show deprivation of a constitutional or federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Thomas v. Shaw · filed 2015-12-02

In order to support a cause of action for a federal civil rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show that (1) he was deprived of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or the laws of the United States; and (2) that the deprivation was caused by a person while acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 provides a civil action against a person acting under color of state law for deprivation of rights secured by the Constitution and federal law.

Crump v. Passaic County · filed 2015-12-02

To establish a claim under § 1983, “a plaintiff must demonstrate a violation of a right secured- by the -Constitution and the laws of the United States [and] that the alleged deprivation was committed by a -person acting under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Kabrovski v. City of Rochester · filed 2015-12-03

“To prevail on a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege (1) “that some person has deprived him of a federal right,” and (2) “that the person who has deprived him of that right acted under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a deprivation of a constitutional or federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Skipper v. Clark · filed 2015-12-03

“To state a claim under § 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.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff suing an official individually to allege a violation of a federal right committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Lewis v. Government of the District of Columbia · filed 2015-12-07

“To state a claim under § 1983 against an official in his individual capacity, a plaintiff must plead facts sufficient to allege (1) ‘the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and the laws of the United States,’ and (2) ‘that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.’”

Section 1983 requires a deprivation of a federal right caused by a person acting under color of state law.

O'Donnell v. City of Cleveland · filed 2015-12-08

To state a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must allege that: 1) he was deprived of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Federal Constitution or laws of the United States, and 2) the deprivation was caused by a person while acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 allows a person deprived of a constitutional or statutory right by someone acting under color of state law to seek relief.

Faust, Joey Darrell · filed 2015-12-09

To obtain relief pursuant to Section 1983, a plaintiff must show that he was deprived of a right under the Constitution or laws of the United States by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show deprivation of a constitutional or federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Marroquin v. State · filed 2015-12-09

To obtain relief pursuant to Section 1983, a plaintiff must show that he was deprived of a right under the Constitution or laws of the United States by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 provides a civil remedy for deprivation of federal rights by state actors and does not itself create substantive rights.

Garcia v. Hudak · filed 2016-01-05

“In order to state a claim under Section 1983 for the State’s failure to disclose the presence of Brady evidence, Plaintiff “must make a ‘showing that the favorable evidence could reasonably be taken to put the whole case in such a different light as to undermine confidence in the verdict.’” ... Applying the Brady elements to Plaintiffs complaint, the Court finds further that he has stated a claim for deprivation of his constitutional right to procedural due process. ... Accordingly, Plaintiff has plausibly alleged all of the elements of a Brady claim.

Section 1983 requires proof that the defendant acted under color of state law and deprived the plaintiff of federal rights.

Babb v. L. Plusa, RN BSN · filed 2016-01-06

With respect to 42 U.S.C. §1983, a plaintiff must satisfy two essential elements: (1) “the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law”; and (2) “this conduct deprived a person of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or the laws of the United States.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show deprivation of a constitutional or federal right under color of state law.

Smith v. Deemer · filed 2016-01-11

To prevail on a § 1983 claim, “a plaintiff must demonstrate both (1) that the defendant deprived [him] of a right secured under the Constitution or federal law and (2) that such a deprivation occurred under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show that a constitutional or federal statutory right was violated by a person acting under color of state law.

Flanders v. Dzugan · filed 2016-01-11

To establish a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must demonstrate the violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show that the defendant acted under color of state law and deprived the plaintiff of a federal statutory or constitutional right.

Kinkus v. Village of Yorkville · filed 2006-09-28

To establish a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must satisfy two elements: (1) that the defendant acted under color of state law, and (2) that the defendant deprived the plaintiff of a federal statutory or constitutional right.

Section 1983 requires action under color of state law and deprivation of a constitutional or federal statutory right.

John Doe and Jane Doe v. Brady Smith, Dianne Shepard, Kathryn Fletcher · filed 2006-11-28

To state a claim under section 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) the alleged conduct was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) the activity deprived a person of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

Section 1983 requires proof that the defendant acted under color of law and deprived the plaintiff of a clearly established constitutional or federal statutory right.

Moore v. Weekly · filed 2016-02-01

To prevail on a claim brought under 42 U.S.C § 1983, Plaintiffs must prove that Defendants acted “under color of law” and that their conduct deprived Plaintiff of a clearly established right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or the laws of the United States.

Section 1983 requires alleging deprivation of a constitutional or federal right by a person acting under color of law.

Knox v. Trustees of Indiana University · filed 2016-02-01

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or federal law, by a person acting under color of law.

Section 1983 requires a complaint to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Choate v. Lemmings · filed 2008-09-22

A § 1983 complaint needs but two allegations to state a cause of action: (1) that the plaintiff was deprived of a federal right; and (2) that the person who deprived him acted under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege misconduct under color of state law that deprived her of a federal right.

Sottosanti-Mack v. Reinhart · filed 2016-03-28

To state a claim under Section 1983, Plaintiff must meet two threshold requirements. She must aver: (1) that alleged'misconduct was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) that as- a result, she was deprived of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

Section 1983 requires proof of a deprivation of a constitutional or federal statutory right by a defendant acting under color of state law.

Gill v. Kovach · filed 2010-07-27

To succeed on a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must prove two elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was deprived, and (2) that the defendant committed the violation while acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right under color of state law.

Slakman v. L. Gale Buckner, James Donald · filed 2011-07-22

To state a claim under § 1983, “a plaintiff must allege that (1) the defendant deprived him of a right secured under the United States Constitution or federal law and (2) such deprivation occurred under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff suing a state official under the Eighth Amendment to prove sufficiently serious harm and deliberate indifference.

Chao v. Ballista · filed 2011-07-28

To prevail on a § 1983 claim against a state official under the Eighth Amendment, a plaintiff must show that (1) the alleged conduct is “objectively, sufficiently serious” so as to constitute the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain, and (2) that the prison official was “deliberately] indifferen[t] to inmate health or safety” and had a “sufficiently culpable state of mind.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show that the challenged action occurred under color of state law and deprived the plaintiff of a constitutional right.

Jefferson v. Rose · filed 2012-04-23

To establish a prima facie case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff must show that: (1) the challenged action occurred “under color of state law” and (2) the action deprived Plaintiff of a constitutional right.

Section 1983 requires plaintiffs to plausibly plead conduct under color of state law and a denial of rights secured by the Constitution or federal law.

Najas Realty, LLC v. Seekonk Water District · filed 2016-05-02

With respect to the § 1983 claims, plaintiffs must plausibly plead two essential elements, "(i) that the conduct complained of has been committed under color of state law, and (ii) that this conduct worked a denial of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States."

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a constitutional or statutory right and deprivation by a person acting under color of state law.

Pratt Ex Rel. Estate of Pratt v. Harris County · filed 2016-05-03

To establish a claim under § 1983, “a plaintiff must (1) allege a violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and (2) demonstrate that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.”

Section 1983 permits a plaintiff to seek relief for a constitutional-rights violation by a government official, subject to qualified immunity.

Hoyland v. McMenomy · filed 2016-05-05

To sustain a First Amendment retaliatory arrest claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must show that: (1) he engaged in a protected activity, (2) a government official acted against him in a way that would “chill a person of ordinary firmness from continuing in the activity,” (3) the government’s adverse act was motivated at least in part by the plaintiff engaging in the protected activity, and (4) the government official lacked at least arguable probable cause to arrest the plaintiff.

Section 1983 provides a claim when a person acting under color of state or District of Columbia law deprives someone of constitutional or federal rights.

Modrall v. Frey · filed 2016-06-15

Nor does the complaint allege facts sufficient to show for purposes of § 1983 that a person acting under color of State or District of Columbia law committed an action that deprived him of rights protected under the United States Constitution or federal law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a federal right violation caused by a person acting under color of state law.

Salazar-Limon v. City of Houston · filed 2016-06-16

To establish a claim under § 1983, “a plaintiff must (1) allege a violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and (2) demonstrate that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show deprivation of a constitutional or federal right caused by someone acting under color of state law.

Emanuel v. Wayne County, MI · filed 2016-06-20

To succeed on a claim brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Emanuel “must set forth facts that, when construed favorably, establish (1) the deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States (2) caused by a person acting under the color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to prove that the challenged conduct was committed by a person acting under color of state law and deprived the plaintiff of rights secured by the Constitution or federal laws.

Sook Lee v. Kim · filed 2016-06-20

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must “prove two essential elements: (1) that the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) that the conduct deprived the plaintiff of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to prove a deprivation of a constitutional or statutory right by a person acting under color of state law.

Toliver v. New York City Department of Corrections · filed 2016-07-29

To prevail on a claim brought under Section 1983, a plaintiff must prove, by preponderance of the evidence,. “(1) the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and (2) the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires misconduct under color of state law that deprives a person of a constitutional or federal statutory right.

Cook County Republican Party v. Board of Election Commissioners · filed 2016-08-02

To state a claim for relief under Section 1983, the GOP must show (1) misconduct that “was committed by a person acting under the color of state law” and (2) that as a result of that misconduct it was deprived of “a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States” (West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988)).

Section 1983 does not make setting aside a conviction an element of a damages claim; a plaintiff must show that the conviction was set aside when the requested relief would undermine it.

Washington v. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department · filed 2016-08-12

The fact that a conviction has been set aside is not an element of the claim at issue. Indeed, a particular plaintiff’s need to demonstrate that his conviction has been set aside is contingent on a threshold legal determination, made by the court, that the requested relief would undermine the underlying conviction.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show deprivation of a federal right by defendants acting under color of state law who are not protected by qualified immunity.

Smith v. Kent County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Inc. · filed 2016-09-28

To prevail on his 42 U.S.C. §1983 claim, Mr. Smith must show that (1) he was deprived of a federal right, (2) the Defendants were acting under color of state law, and (3) that the Defendants are not protected by any qualified immunity.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of their own federal rights by a person acting under color of state law; harm from an alleged violation of someone else’s rights does not state a claim.

Reihner v. County of Washington · filed 2016-12-05

To state a claim under § 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 (1988). They alleged only financial suffering and attendant difficulties because of purported violations to their son’s constitutional rights. Accordingly, they did not state a claim.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of federal rights committed by a person acting under color of state law.

L.R. Williams v. Shawley · filed 2017-01-05

The facts pled in Williams’ complaint give rise to an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. To state a claim under Section 1983, a plaintiff must 1) allege a violation of rights secured by the United States Constitution and/or the laws of the United States, and 2) show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a violation of a constitutional or federal right committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Rigler v. Lampert · filed 2017-03-31

“To state a claim under § 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.”

Section 1983 requires conduct under color of law that deprives a person of rights secured by the Constitution or federal law.

Lyszkowski v. Gibbons · filed 2017-04-13

To recover under § 1983, “(1) the conduct complained of must have been done by some person acting under color of law; and (2) such conduct must have subjected the complainant to the deprivation of rights, privileges, or immunities secured to him by the Constitution and laws of the United States.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right and a deprivation committed by someone acting under color of state law.

Guillory v. Day · filed 2017-04-24

To state a claim under § 1983, “a plaintiff must (1) allege a violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and (2) demonstrate that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.” James v. Tex. Collin Cty., 535 F.3d 365, 373 (5th Cir. 2008) (quoting Moore v. Willis Indep. Sch. Dist., 233 F.3d 871, 874 (5th Cir. 2000)).

Section 1983 requires a plausible allegation that defendants acting under color of state law deprived the plaintiff of a federal right.

Hawk v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation · filed 2017-06-30

The district court properly dismissed Hawk’s action because Hawk failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible due process claim, and failed to allege that he was otherwise “deprived . . . of rights secured by the Constitution or federal statutes” by “defendants act[ing] under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires facts showing a deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Brooks v. Brooks · filed 2017-06-30

The district court properly dismissed appellant’s action because appellant failed to allege facts sufficient to show that he was “(1) depriv[ed] of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and (2) that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Howard v. Mobile County Board of School Commissioners · filed 2017-11-02

Howard must show a violation of a right secured by the Constitution of the United States, and that the deprivation of that right committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show that someone acting under color of state law deprived the plaintiff of a constitutional right.

Taylor v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc. · filed 2018-03-06

To state a claim under § 1983, Plaintiff must show that someone acting under the color of state law deprived him of a constitutional right.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege conduct under color of state law that deprived someone of a right secured by the Constitution or federal law.

Strope v. Burris · filed 2018-04-13

A plaintiff can bring a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in state or federal court. ... To state a valid claim under this provision, a "petition must allege two essential elements: (1) whether the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law, and (2) whether this conduct deprived a person of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or federal law."

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a defendant acting under color of state law violated a right secured by the Constitution.

Hubbard v. Stout · filed 2018-04-23

In order to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that the defendant acted under color of state law and that he violated a right secured by the Constitution.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right under color of state law.

Womack v. Owens · filed 2018-06-04

Finally, Count 4 is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. “To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, and that the alleged deprivation was committed under color of state law.” Thomas, 841 F.3d at 637 (internal quotation marks omitted). Liberally construing the complaint, we find that Ruth Womack alleged that she was deprived of her property, by state actors, without due process of law, when she claimed that DSS blocked her access to her bank account prior to a ruling finding her incompetent.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show that a person acting under color of state law deprived the plaintiff of a federal right.

Ribbing v. State of Florida · filed 2018-12-07

To state a claim for relief under section 1983, a plaintiff must show that he was deprived of a federal right by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a claim against an individual defendant to allege action under color of state law and a violation of a federal right.

Harrington v. Strong · filed 2019-01-29

To state a claim under § 1983 against the City Defendants individually, Plaintiffs must allege they "act[ed] under the color of state law" and violated "a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States."

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show a deprivation of a federal right under color of state law.

Wilson v. Calderon · filed 2019-03-20

To prevail on a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show that there has been a denial of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that the deprivation of such right, privilege, or immunity occurred under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to identify the constitutional or federal right the defendant violated.

Crandell v. Hardy County Rural Development Authority · filed 2019-05-10

Nowhere in the Amended Complaint does Plaintiff allege which constitutional right or federal right was violated by Defendant. Accordingly, the undersigned FINDS that the Plaintiff has failed establish an essential element of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim and has therefore failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a deprivation of federal rights by a defendant acting under color of state law.

Martinez v. Tennessee Board of Regents · filed 2019-06-07

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) a deprivation of rights secured by the “Constitution and laws” of the United States (2) committed by a defendant acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Meisel v. Town of Greenburgh · filed 2019-07-01

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege both that: (1) a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) the right was violated by a person acting under the color of state law, or a “state actor.” West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48-49 (1988).

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived them of a federal right.

Greenhalgh v. Social Security Administration · filed 2019-07-12

Because Mr. Greenhalgh’s HSD claim, which he brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, does not allege a constitutional violation by an individual acting under color of state law, it is subject to this Court’s dismissal.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Coney v. John/Jane Doe · filed 2019-07-18

Because Plaintiff asserts a claim that Defendants violated his constitutional rights, his claim is construed as arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege both that: (1) a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) the right was violated by a person acting under the color of state law, or a “state actor.” West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48-49 (1988).

Section 1983 requires a deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Harmer v. Parker · filed 2019-07-18

In order to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must establish that he was deprived of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Brooks v. Artus · filed 2019-08-12

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and (2) the deprivation was visited upon him by a person or persons acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to plead deprivation of a constitutional right by a person acting under color of state law.

Garrett v. Wexford Health · filed 2019-09-10

Under § 1983, a plaintiff must plead a deprivation of a constitutional right by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Vales v. Manthei · filed 2019-09-12

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: 1) he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and 2) the deprivation was visited upon him by a person or persons acting under color of state law.

A § 1983 plaintiff must plausibly allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of law.

Savage v. White · filed 2019-09-16

Finally, to bring a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege (1) the deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and (2) the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of law. ... Ms. Savage has not plausibly alleged a § 1983 claim here.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Lomack v. Beam · filed 2019-09-20

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated and (2) that the violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

JOHNSON v. HARRISON · filed 2019-09-20

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.

A Section 1983 complaint must allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived the plaintiff of a federal right.

Gantt v. Rhoton · filed 2019-10-01

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a complaint must allege: (1) the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law, and (2) the conduct deprived a person of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

Section 1983 requires an alleged violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

McElroy v. Adam · filed 2019-10-09

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Smith v. Fu · filed 2019-10-10

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Hayes v. Martinez · filed 2019-10-17

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived them of a federal statutory or constitutional right.

Coates v. Nwaokocha · filed 2019-10-21

In order to state a viable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived him or her of a constitutional right or of a right conferred by a law of the United States.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of law deprived him of a right secured by the Constitution.

Jones v. Jefferson County Justice Center · filed 2019-10-23

Plaintiff has filed his lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which requires him to allege that a person’s conduct acting under the color of law deprived him “of any rights privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution”.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived them of a federal constitutional or statutory right.

Hayes v. Grimes · filed 2019-10-25

In order to state a viable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived him or her of a constitutional right or of a right conferred by a law of the United States.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Swain v. Director of Corrections · filed 2019-10-25

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated and (2) that the violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a defendant acting under color of state law deprived the plaintiff of a federal right.

Posey v. Jackson · filed 2019-10-29

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) a deprivation of rights secured by the “Constitution and laws” of the United States (2) committed by a defendant acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Diaz v. Ndina · filed 2019-11-04

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: 1) he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and 2) the deprivation was visited upon him by a person or persons acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to plead a deprivation of a federal right committed under color of state law.

Nicholas v. Ball · filed 2019-11-05

In order to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must plead that he was (1) deprived of a right; (2) secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and (3) that the alleged deprivation was committed under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a complaint to allege that a person acting under color of state, territorial, or District of Columbia law caused the deprivation of a federal right.

Lopez v. Unknown Individuals · filed 2019-11-13

To state a claim under § 1983, a complaint must allege facts sufficient to support a reasonable inference that (1) a person (2) acting under color of state, territorial, or District of Columbia law (3) subjected plaintiff or caused plaintiff to be subjected (4) to the deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. City of Oklahoma City v. Tuttle, 471 U.S. 808, 829 (1985). Here, plaintiff has failed to provide information specific enough to satisfy these elements.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Cervantes v. Burciaga · filed 2019-11-13

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a deprivation of federal rights by a defendant acting under color of state law.

Nelson v. Methodist Hospitals · filed 2019-11-20

The Court agrees with and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation that Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed for failure to state a claim and lack of subject matter jurisdiction. As found by the Magistrate, Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim because Plaintiff fails to allege the two elements necessary for a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983—(1) a deprivation of rights secured by the “Constitution and laws” of the United States (2) committed by a defendant acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person deprived him of a federal right while acting under color of state law.

Abbatiello v. Metzger · filed 2019-11-25

When bringing a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must allege that some person has deprived him of a federal right, and that the person who caused the deprivation acted under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Kirksey v. Brennan · filed 2019-11-25

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and (2) the deprivation was visited upon him by a person or persons acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a violation of a federal right proximately caused by a person acting under color of state law.

Jackson v. Berkey · filed 2019-12-02

In order to state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show: (1) he suffered a violation of rights protected by the Constitution or created by federal statute, and (2) the violation was proximately caused by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by someone acting under color of state law.

Love v. Meli · filed 2019-12-05

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that someone deprived him of a right secured by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, and that whoever deprived him of this right was acting under the color of state law.

A § 1983 plaintiff must show deprivation of a federal right by someone acting under color of state law.

Cummings v. City of Wheeling, West Virginia · filed 2019-12-05

To succeed on a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must show (1) that he was deprived of a right “secured by the Constitution and the laws” of the United States, and (2) that the individual who deprived him of the right was acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Smith v. Mendoza · filed 2019-12-16

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Shuler v. South Carolina Department of Social Services · filed 2019-12-16

Shuler’s presentation of facts in her damages objections likewise fails to establish a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Such a claim requires a plaintiff to allege: 1) a “violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States,” and 2) “the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires facts showing that the defendant acted under color of state law and deprived the plaintiff of a federally protected right.

Cox v. Dewey · filed 2019-12-17

Moreover, plaintiff has failed to present facts sufficient to allege a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Zutz v. Nelson, 601 F.3d 842, 848 (8th Cir. 2010) (explaining that to state a § 1983 claim “a plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to show (1) that the defendant(s) acted under color of state law, and (2) that the alleged wrongful conduct deprived the plaintiff of a constitutionally protected federal right”).

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

BLAIZE v. TALBOT · filed 2019-12-19

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law violated a federal right.

Guzman v. Warden Fuentez · filed 2019-12-20

The M&R correctly states the applicable legal standard. “To state a claim 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.”

Section 1983 requires a violation of a federal right proximately caused by a person acting under color of state law.

Sumner v. Allstate Insurance Corp · filed 2019-12-20

The Court notes that to state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show: (1) he suffered a violation of rights protected by the Constitution or created by federal statute, and (2) the violation was proximately caused by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law violated a federal right.

Baptiste v. Hatton · filed 2019-12-26

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated; and (2) that the violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a defendant acting under color of state law deprived the plaintiff of a federal right.

Davis v. Memphis Area Teachers Credit Union · filed 2019-12-27

As found by the Magistrate Judge, Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim because Plaintiff fails to allege the two elements necessary for a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983—(1) a deprivation of rights secured by the “Constitution and laws” of the United States (2) committed by a defendant acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a violation of a federal right proximately caused by a person acting under color of state law.

Jackson v. Berkey · filed 2019-12-30

In order to state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show: (1) he suffered a violation of rights protected by the Constitution or created by federal statute, and (2) the violation was proximately caused by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires conduct by a person acting under color of state law that causes the deprivation of a right secured by federal law.

Vincent v. Stewart · filed 2020-01-02

The elements of a cause of action under Section 1983 for deprivation of a federal constitutional or statutory right are: (a) the conduct (act, omission, or policy) complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law, and (b) the act, omission, or policy caused a deprivation of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to show that a person acting under color of state law deprived the plaintiff of a federal right.

Madding v. Parker · filed 2020-01-07

In order to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must establish that he was deprived of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a federal rights violation committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Rodriguez v. Williams · filed 2020-01-13

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) the violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Fuller v. UMC Medical University Medical Facility · filed 2020-01-15

This claim for negligence does not implicate a right secured by the Constitution nor does Plaintiff demonstrate that UMC was acting under the color of law. As such, Plaintiff has not alleged sufficient facts to support a claim under Section 1983 against UMC.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law violated a federal right.

Quair v. San Mateo County Jail · filed 2020-01-23

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of federal rights by a person acting under color of state law.

MENDENHALL v. CARTER · filed 2020-01-24

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Grijalva v. Santa Clara County · filed 2020-01-27

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federally protected right by a person acting under color of state law.

Francisco v. Attorney General · filed 2020-01-31

To state a civil rights action under § 1983, a plaintiff must show that he has been deprived of a federally protected right by a person acting “under color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law violated a federal right.

Kastner v. Tri State Eye · filed 2020-02-03

To state a claim under § 1983, Plaintiff must allege both that: (1) a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) the right was violated by a person acting under the color of state law, or a “state actor.” West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48-49 (1988).

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Harper v. Murphy · filed 2020-02-10

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: 1) he was deprived of a right secured by the constitution or laws of the United States; and 2) the deprivation was visited upon him by a person or persons acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that someone acting under color of state law deprived the plaintiff of a federal right.

Hunter v. Mueske · filed 2020-02-25

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983, the plaintiff must allege that 1) someone deprived him of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and 2) whoever deprived him of that right was acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Vega v. Sawyer · filed 2020-02-28

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff first must allege a violation of a right secured by the Constitution or under the laws of the United States; and, second allege that the deprivation was committed or caused by a person actin under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Robinson v. Huber · filed 2020-03-02

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: 1) he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and 2) the deprivation was visited upon him by a person or persons acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal constitutional right or federal law.

Briggs v. Addenton · filed 2020-03-02

At the very least, they do not meet the elements of a Section 1983 claim insofar as no violation of a federal constitutional right or federal law is asserted.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived them of a federal right.

Welty, Jr. v. Ritter · filed 2020-03-06

In order to state a viable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived him or her of a constitutional right or of a right conferred by a law of the United States.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a deprivation of a federal right by someone acting under color of state law.

West v. Eckstein · filed 2020-03-10

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983, a plaintiff must allege that 1) someone deprived him of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and 2) whoever deprived him of that right was acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Mireles v. Koening · filed 2020-03-10

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated; and (2) that the violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Weatherspoon 284633 v. Gainer · filed 2020-03-10

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the federal Constitution or laws and must show that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

McDonald v. Gilyani · filed 2020-03-11

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983, a plaintiff must allege that 1) someone deprived him of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and 2) that the person who deprived him of that right was acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to plead a deprivation of a federal right committed under color of state law.

Robinson v. Sabin · filed 2020-03-12

In order to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must plead that he was (1) deprived of a right; (2) secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and (3) that the alleged deprivation was committed under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to identify a violation of the Constitution or federal law committed by someone acting under color of state law.

Harrington v. City of Shiner, Texas · filed 2020-03-20

As such, to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must demonstrate: (1) a violation of the United States Constitution or of federal law; and (2) that the violation was committed by someone acting under the color of state law. Here, the Harrington’s complaint lacks specificity as to how 42 U.S.C. § 1983 — the basis of his complaint applies to the facts he has presented. He has failed to identify any constitutional or federal law violation.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law violated a federal right.

Nicholson v. Sando · filed 2020-03-20

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right under color of state law.

Bush v. Tony's Crew, Inc. · filed 2020-03-24

Under this type of jurisdiction, and in order to bring a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that the defendants deprived her of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that the alleged deprivation was committed under “color of state law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Fuller v. United States · filed 2020-03-24

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) the violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law violated a federal right.

Rael v. Pantoja · filed 2020-03-27

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Quair v. Speer · filed 2020-03-27

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. ... Plaintiff’s claims are undermined by a lack of factual allegations, let alone facts that might make his claims plausible. For these reasons, the complaint is dismissed with leave to amend.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Gonzalez v. San Mateo County Jail Medical Providers · filed 2020-03-30

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. ... Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff states a cognizable § 1983 claim.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of federal rights by a person acting under color of state law.

Silverman v. Napa State Hospital · filed 2020-03-30

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. ... This action shall proceed against Defendants Erin Sherman and Ken Maiseld at NHS. The Clerk shall terminate all other Defendants from this action.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that defendants acted under color of state law and deprived the plaintiff of rights secured by the Constitution or federal statutes.

Gholson v. State of Nevada · filed 2020-02-14

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege “(1) the defendants acting under color of state law (2) deprived plaintiffs of rights secured by the Constitution or federal statutes.” Williams v. California, 764 F.3d 1002, 1009 (9th Cir. 2014) (quotation omitted).

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that the defendant acted under color of state law and deprived the plaintiff of a right secured by federal law.

Dawkins v. Copeland · filed 2020-03-31

To succeed under Section 1983, Dawkins must allege that (1) defendants are state actors or acted under color of state law at the time of the challenged action, and (2) the challenged action deprived him of a right secured by the Constitution or federal law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Reed v. California Department of Corrections · filed 2020-04-01

The complaint is deficient because Mr. Reed fails to satisfy the two elements to establish a § 1983 claim: (1) the violation of a constitutional right, and (2) the violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

A Section 1983 complaint must allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Blackshear v. Kruse · filed 2020-04-02

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: 1) he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and 2) the deprivation was visited upon him by a person or persons acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived them of a federal right.

Blackshear v. Doe · filed 2020-04-02

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: 1) he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and 2) the deprivation was visited upon him by a person or persons acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Blackshear v. Larson · filed 2020-04-02

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: 1) he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and 2) the deprivation was visited upon him by a person or persons acting under color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of law.

Sims v. Stanton · filed 2020-04-06

To the extent that Plaintiff attempts to bring a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, he fails to state a claim for relief. ... To the extent that Plaintiff is seeking to state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff “must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of law.”

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived him of a federal right.

Ash v. Daniel · filed 2020-04-08

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived him of a right secured under the Constitution or laws of the United States.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Quair v. Brown · filed 2020-04-17

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under color of state law.

Chavez Sol v. San Francisco County Jail Facility · filed 2020-04-17

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Section 1983 does not govern a due process challenge to a tax sale raised as part of a quiet title action.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Game Commission v. Thomas E. Proctor Heirs Trust · filed 2020-04-21

At the outset, we reject the Game Commission’s contentions that the Proctor Trusts’ due process claim arises under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or is barred by the statute of limitations in the Act of 1815.

Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege deprivation of a federal constitutional right by defendants acting under color of state law.

LOVINS v. CITY OF COLUMBUS · filed 2020-04-27

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, “a plaintiff must allege: (1) that defendants deprived him of a federal constitutional right; and (2) that the defendants acted under color of state law.” Savory v. Lyons, 469 F.3d 667, 670 (7th Cir. 2006) (citations omitted). ... Accordingly, we will permit Mr. Lovins to proceed on his Fourth Amendment claims against Officers Decker and Maddox as well as his Monell claim against the City of Columbus, but this action will be stayed pending the conclusion of Mr. Lovins’s state court criminal proceedings.