Section 1983 Basics

Рет қаралды 68,557

Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Institute of Technology

10 жыл бұрын

Professor Sheldon Nahmod covers the basics of section 1983 for lawyers. He discusses the elements of the section 1983 claim, individual immunities (absolute and qualified) and local government liability. It also includes Tenth Circuit cases of relevance to this particular audience.
This presentation was given in December of 2013 to the New Mexico Defense Lawyers Association.

Пікірлер: 115

@BrendaColvin 8 жыл бұрын

He betta preach. Money well spent. I will take out extra loans just to attend this school. Please upload more of his lectures. I would love to attend this school.

@BILLUPS811 2 жыл бұрын

Alright now! Go head! Mmhmm! Let him use you!

@catwoman2596 Жыл бұрын

Lol...bet you're still screwed TODAY.

@Djsaviour 8 ай бұрын

Really enjoyed this professors insight into 1983 👏🏾

@yevgeniyzharinov7473 5 жыл бұрын

I think that he is the world's leading expert on this subject.

@jlowrey68 2 жыл бұрын

This guy is a genius and very well spoken on the subject

@Kingdom_Finance 5 жыл бұрын

The real MVP around 21:00 Section 1983 can be used to redress Dormant Commerce Clause violations; which may include damages, injunctive relief, and Attorney’s Fees.

@whyownperhapsjustusethings9471 3 жыл бұрын

I’d love to see someone actually win, and see their process.

@sandyservantes3777 9 жыл бұрын

Sandy Servantes Very helpful video, thank you, Professor: Shelon and you tube, very much for such professional legal information. Please continue with your programs, updated materials!

@jonnieringo2140 Жыл бұрын

Now you know why lyiers will push a plea deal to a lesser crime. Once convicted, you cannot sue in Fed District Court.

@Tmansgokarts 4 жыл бұрын

hey Kent College, do you have a downloadable pdf of the packet he is referencing. What he has supplied to the audience. I am studding 1983's and would love to use this video and the packet as a study guide .

@jesscast5122 Жыл бұрын

Do you want Ice cream and a Fanning by a slave to go along with that?...............

@nwchrista 7 жыл бұрын

Seems he did a pretty good job, discussing the relative differences between relative and qualified immunity. A credit to the alma mater, i.e...IIT.

@BlindJustice 4 жыл бұрын

Anyone out there want to help a blind veteran file some 1983 suits?

@JustinPulliam 2 жыл бұрын

Fitting to find you here I suppose. Were you able to fight back?

@BlindJustice 2 жыл бұрын

@@JustinPulliam still working on it. They’re still prosecuting two frivolous cases against me. End of January is when both are currently scheduled.

@thestatevsmeisfraudthestat3975 2 жыл бұрын

Sue the judge n Proscuter for violation or ur due process.

@kirkstable Жыл бұрын

I follow you

@eastexasupdates2559 Жыл бұрын

You are very good at what you do I hope you find what you are looking for.

@renemcintyre3653 Жыл бұрын

Great lecture on civil rights.

@desertpunk6705 10 ай бұрын

I know this is 9 years ago, but it’s interesting to hear him discuss Heller and McDonald, post Bruen.

@eliazruis4761 Жыл бұрын

I wish I had that depth of knowledge in any area of law.

@TarasDeliberations 5 ай бұрын

Do you have this in the outline form referenced or is it all attached in your description? I’ve watched all of your sec 1983 videos at least 10 times each so far and would love to have access to a hard copy or the like for reference? I am really needing to help set a precedent. Is there any way to contact you?

@forpublicsafety 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for this

@Ahmed-lp2pu 5 жыл бұрын

Prof. Sheldon, Thank you very much. I'm interested in Judicial Immunity topic. I am wondering, can someone bring an action against the U.S. government to cover his or her damages relying on the FTCA or Section 1983 because of a federal judge action that causes damages to one of the parties. Thank you.

@randcadmus4351 4 жыл бұрын

Uhh no.

@jkrefoundation1414 4 жыл бұрын

Exactly, you go after someone personally. Their name and badge number, license number, or oath of office.

@GoogleAccount-om6ju Жыл бұрын

Attended a testimony hearing they informed it is civil and officer said he had a verified it with the state attorney general so after questioning him and getting that response..judge ask me if I wanted to take oath/testimony..i said no just wanna present my concerns.I ask the judge can I present my concerns and he responds you can present/say a statement that doesn't follow with any facts...I didn't respond but how do I get to ask the judge before other testimony..also I forgot to mention in special appearance when I arrived. I'm still learning and practicing. Need help perfecting my approach

@victormitchell3897 11 ай бұрын

nice work man

@JusticeforJessica-Gomez 5 ай бұрын

Thank you

@eliazruis4761 10 ай бұрын

How can I receive the outline from this presentation?

@yevgeniyzharinov7473 6 жыл бұрын

Does one file a tort claim for a section 1983 lawsuit? If so what is the Statute of Limitations?

@Kingdom_Finance 5 жыл бұрын

Yevgeniy Zharinov 1983 claims are considered a species of tort. The statute of limitations in 1983 cases is the same as whatever state you’re in for personal injuries....... The court will also exercise supplemental jurisdiction on all state law tort claims that are related to the federal claims based on Res Judica doctrine. Look it up.

@yevgeniyzharinov7473 5 жыл бұрын

@@Kingdom_Finance whats res udica doctrine?

@Kingdom_Finance 5 жыл бұрын

Yevgeniy Zharinov, Res Judica is basically like double jeopardy in civil cases. It basically says that an issue can only be litigated once; barring any equity considerations. Therefore, when you bring a claim, you should bring all viable claims related to the incident.

@rlsullivan85 4 жыл бұрын

Does anyone know if Section 1983 is a successful way of appealing a license to carry denial but a local police chief?

@hamzakaroumia1519 3 жыл бұрын

based on the video: "To prevail in a claim under section 1983, the plaintiff must prove two critical points: a person subjected the plaintiff to conduct that occurred under color of state law, and this conduct deprived the plaintiff of rights, privileges, or immunities guaranteed under federal law or the U.S. Constitution". So basically you need to be deprived of a fundamental right or privilege (in the example you provided 'license to carry') and by an agent of the gov (police chief). However, you may have or you may not have a claim, depends on many things. Lawyer competence, facts of the matter, who the judge is, etc. good luck

@calebc6028 2 жыл бұрын

In Hertado v. California, 110 US 516, the U.S Supreme Court states very plainly: "The state cannot diminish rights of the people." And in Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60, "Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void." I'm not a lawyer but id say sue their ass.

@zhartheProprietor 5 ай бұрын

A license is a privilege, bearing arms is a right so...🤷‍♂️

@Harlem55 6 жыл бұрын

Great work, although he is incorrect in a couple points- first the supreme court has ruled that an "unofficial policy" is subject to 1983 liability. Secondly, with respect to "failure to train" the nexus is more closely related to whether or not the violation could have been reasonably perceived in light of nationally recognized training standards (such as those promulgated by the DOJ.) . If so, the defendants will almost invariably loose on issue of immunity. This is because states, county, and local governments are required to comply with DOJ standards as a bare minimum, as a matter of federal law.

@jls99500 5 жыл бұрын

I understand it the same. I have filed a claim against the town of Salem NH PD. I'm not sure that my attorney knows the depth of the actual case ! He is all caught up on excessive force ! But I believe that the issue stems from a wrongful prosecution based on a clerical error between two state agencies. Dhhs requested DMV suspend or revoke privilege to operate a motor vehicle. So.. I bring a letter of compliance to DMV from dhhs.... I'm told "it may be tomorrow before we get the paperwork" I say... "Its right here" DMV says "were just waiting on another fax" " It may come in later" Long story short... The second fax never came.. Dhhs filled out the letter of compliance with the same case number twice, instead of the two case numbers attached to me... So because dhhs did not fill out the compliance order properly the (100$ privilege reinstatement fee) could not be paid to reinstate my privilege to operate a motor vehicle. Even though the compliance letter renewed my license in my home state of Michigan. That is what brought this motor vehicle stop to an all out assault on myself and fiance and k9 by 6-8 cops in less than 3 minutes ! I was tased 6 times before I ever raised my voice, then tased 8-10 more times while officers were kneeling on me.. When I got hit with two tasers at I reeled back in my seat because the prongs were hot and burned me.. I thought I'd been shot !! So I instinctively went into defense mode and put my rubber sole shoe in front of the taser ! They arrested my fiance just so they could steal the phones because they did not know which one held the video of the incident ! Cops say I kicked and punched and assaulted them ! When in actuality..... They assaulted us like a swat team & we were bank robbers....or murderers or... like wealthy folks who pulled up in gang territory is more like it !!! It was pandemonium ! My lawyer did not present any of the evidence he said he was going to, and never called our witnesses dhhs and dmv ! Or my fiance ! He said that's what we were doing on jury pick and the first day of trial... We herd 6 of the 9 cops involved.... And no one else! The trail was rushed and my documents did not get the presentation that they should have ! & They void the whole issue. Because they show my efforts to comply and the fax receipts, with the mistake and then the correction ! My lawyer flashed the civil suit under section 1983 in front of every cop that hit the stand... Why ??? My lawyer sold me out ! Sentencing is Jan of 2019. I will appeal.... I'm looking for another attorney as we speak !

@jls99500 5 жыл бұрын

@@Pyotr_Troyan WOW ! THANKS ALOT..... VERY INFORMATIVE !

@thestatevsmeisfraudthestat3975 2 жыл бұрын

No U sue the city and the wrongdoers.

@Harlem55 2 жыл бұрын

@@thestatevsmeisfraudthestat3975 generally speaking a city government enjoys sovereign immunity from suit, absent relatively rare circumstances. Usually you name the department of a city party in the context of 1983. For example, usually you would name the city of x police department defendant in a 1983 case, not the city of x. The exception to this is ex parte young jurisdiction (which allows pre enforcement injunction to cure a violation of constitutional rights but does not include monetary damages) which is one of the few places the government cannot claim any kind of immunity defense. Properly speaking 1983 is a subspecies of Ex Parte Young that allows the court to impose monetary damages in addition to injunctive relief.

@jesscast5122 Жыл бұрын

At 17:00 Nahmod makes the wrong citation. the right is : REICHLE v. HOWARDS 132 S.Ct. 2088 (2012

@savonel35 3 жыл бұрын

thanks for the great information #overturnterry

@calebc6028 2 жыл бұрын

@FatherlyFreedom Ай бұрын

I just made this lecture into one of my ai Bots on my Server. :)

@patricialucious9353 3 жыл бұрын

How can anything related to filing cases in a court of law b dismissed, denied to even fill a case of any kind ? U see, w/o counsel they walk all over the law, internationally against me in particular. To deny me the right to file, what do I do when that happens ? I have a due process right to b able to file the case and defend myself as the Constitution guarantees, the 14th, for one,, and enough or should be to alert us to the violations committed here by government staff who r still covered for and protected which is the opposite of what actually happened in this case. They r and have been living above the law.

@whyownperhapsjustusethings9471 3 жыл бұрын

Get it time stamped by the post office- send it green card with return receipt.

@peppenewyork1 2 жыл бұрын

I happen to have security camera with audio in my house and police illegally arrested me and they made up an accusation to arrest me

@peppenewyork1 2 жыл бұрын

No one wants the case .. you know anyone can help me ? In New York

@deboraughrodgers6301 2 жыл бұрын

@@peppenewyork1 I’m having difficulty finding representation also.

@RepresentYourself 3 ай бұрын

Because lawyers are officers of the court and generally don't want to be black listed

@disabledvet5124 2 жыл бұрын

This is why I I ALWAYS wear a hidden body cam and LIVESTREAM to a protected off site when ever I leave my private property. Sad , but necessary these days.

@lancefarrar3096 2 жыл бұрын

Hello Disabled Vet 512. I am also a Disabled vet and I see our constitution die more every day. I find that you wear hidden body cam and livestream to an off-site location to be an excellent idea. Can you tell me what you wear and where you send your offsite stuff? I’m confused with this cloud world we love today. Thank you fam. -Lance

@JustinPulliam 2 жыл бұрын

Always record the police.

@deboraughrodgers6301 2 жыл бұрын

@@lancefarrar3096 I’d like to protect myself in this manner also.

@freewillchoice8052 2 жыл бұрын

What equipment do you use and where does your recording go? I'm interested in obtaining the same. Thanks!

@travarisamps2079 3 жыл бұрын

What is ICC bah query

@travarisamps2079 3 жыл бұрын

At 26:30

@whitenight369 Жыл бұрын

This reminds me of Terminator 2, 1984

@theprochrist Жыл бұрын

CAN a 1983 stop contract interference?

@gabrielcordero82 3 жыл бұрын

CorderovsCommonwealth 2017 case law

@jamesward3522 4 жыл бұрын

Ok, A Police Officer in 2005 shows up seven minutes after I call the Sheriff Department to, threaten me not to speak to or tell them what the local Police just did to me. In fear of my life, I did not do it. Now, the same Officer, now Police Cheif. I call the police over a employee of a Motel I am staying at and the same Officer from 2005 shows up, now Police Cheif of the Department. And make this statment to me , " you want to call the Sherff Deoartmemt again, you remember what happen the last time ". Is that the same as this? Anyone ? Help ? My life has been threatened for 14 years now. I need help, a legal Remind. I hear had no Constitional Right or have had my Consrutional serious violated for over 14 years and it contenus to this day. Why no o e wants to help? Cause I'm white, cause I'm a poor person. When you're taken before a Judge with out a Lawyer and told to shut up. And give a Felony bond for a mistermenor offence. It bad for me. I was always told to tell the truth. But what can you do when the police lie?

@originalandrewmark 2 жыл бұрын

you're right-they're not only wrong, but commit obviously evil acts. Remember that it's better to be full of truth, than full of shit. (not that I've ever experienced that myself🤣

@nativeamericanaffairs1031 Жыл бұрын

U.S.C TITLE 42 1983 12101 SUPREME COURTS RULES ADA

@SP-og9md 6 ай бұрын

Did reason or religion direct y’all’s actions ?

@anm2945 4 жыл бұрын

How convenient to change law to meet situations for Government

@calebc6028 2 жыл бұрын

@deboraughrodgers6301 2 жыл бұрын

@@calebc6028 how can the people stop it from happening?

@calebc6028 2 жыл бұрын

@@deboraughrodgers6301 getting rid of there social security number

@calebc6028 2 жыл бұрын

@@deboraughrodgers6301 high frequency radio check him out

@deboraughrodgers6301 2 жыл бұрын

@@calebc6028 thnx. Just subbed

@glenpontious1284 2 жыл бұрын

If a citizen plaintiff , files a federal complaint against the government And the government says you can't sue the government.. Question. Why did the court take my money for court cost.. I had no court, judge said I can't sue

@Photomonon Жыл бұрын

Yeah well, no man is above the law. Immunity is a smoke screen.

@alfred1965ful 10 күн бұрын

52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

@JusticeforJessica-Gomez 5 ай бұрын

Not only Garcetti but now as of 2023 we have Counterman vs Colorado which upholds 1st amendment rights.

@bigjon420 28 күн бұрын

When ever there jury trials the law is on trial just as much has the defendant. The jury has the standing authority to strike down any unconstitutional laws, enactments, codes, regulations, ordinances.

@SP-og9md 6 ай бұрын

Police are upset because I got injured and got help bringing a lawsuit. Prominent lawsuits.

@joannthomases9304 4 ай бұрын

A ""traveler"" is in compliance to their constitution, but why are cops allowed to beat and jail anyone out here ? Does the group called representatives see ??? What does it mean to ""pay"" exactly and then why doesn't any school teach how we pay, bills of exchange, fed bkg. Rules ? And how long can a bank own property ?? Who and what is an assignment, an indentured trustee ? Why is it unfair that none are taught this in school ? Is their a phrase, called "no fair play" ? Or full disclosure "must be *had*?" In any sooo called contract ? How about an argument being "" illegitimate "", in a contract ?

@danchavez8987 5 жыл бұрын

Absolute Immunity...Judges may be immune to lawsuit...but their decisions are not...should not their decisions contributing to the convictions used to justify post state actions or function of state actors and their third party contractors that violate Constitutional Rights thereafter of which 1983 are filed (while an appeal is pending)...and the Where equal protection under the law, and due process of the 14th amendment has not yet been exhausted...and after maliciously violating those constitutional rights using the unaffirmed conviction...the case is reversed and remanded...It seems to me that rather ducking of merits of the case allow the jury to determine the merits through evidence and proof therefore allowing the ripening of the case. If justices are to lazy or politically bound or protecting administrative financial liability, allow the jury ...rather than providing legal discrimination of the law through summary dismissals...

@SP-og9md 6 ай бұрын

Ignorance to a system created by others , that’s what education is for others.

@chuckycheese432 Жыл бұрын

Do you have a pamphlet printed out to protect us from the tyranny and let us be free to travel unmolested that we can hand to the guy in the costume with the badge.. that we pay for? So we can keep traveling

@SP-og9md 5 ай бұрын

Burden shifting: it’s your fault .

@jorgesegura8044 Жыл бұрын

Does the Constitution protect a people, and therefore none should be a citizen like tons of yt are showing in the lower case state..not these military STATE OF's pertaining to DC

@musicwitchrachaeloneil4601 3 жыл бұрын

This is all for nothing. The declaration itself says in plain language that qualifiéd immunity is unconstitutional. Anyone interested in seeing this let me know.

@originalandrewmark 2 жыл бұрын

I am- thanks

@joannthomases9304 4 ай бұрын

What then is cannot rule from the bench all about ? Can or cannot rule from the bench ??? Why have can not rule from the bench, in the first place ?????????? Un sound laws make no law ???? Unreasonable laws are strangely mistaken law ? Can a layman be tried in a "foreign language"? Would a special hidden juristiction and legalese be a foreign language to the commonly spoken language of the day ? Is counsil meaning a lawyers' guild membership ? Or council without the membership ??? Making the members be for the foreogner to them, with oaths to their own is also somewhat defeating that clients best outcome..Not truly good business sense. Some say it's non- sensical..We see no truly good outcome. Defamation of Character is already the Capitus Deminutio ! As in lower status ? Seems basically prejudiced, from your very start. God is no respector of persons ??? So how does this even play in ? Does de..fend mean one cannot fend for its own self ?

@SP-og9md 6 ай бұрын

I have Prominent, ears , head , eye , knees , hips. Police. What’s y’all’s excuse for following inadmissible evidence ? Are y’all ignorant ? Ijs

@bigjon420 Ай бұрын

1. Treason and fraud isn't protected under qualified immunity. 2. Qualified immunity doesn't apply to foreign corporate agents who are acting In their private corporate capacity. 3. Agents are not greater then their principles 4. Those supreme court corporate judges do not have standing to give qualified immunity to agents who commit treason, sedition and fraud.