Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

CLAIMS UNDER 98342 USC §1983 “provides a cause of action for the…

- - - - and to Inc. Bill of Rights???
      - No Vague laws
      - Substantive DP bars arbitrary wrongful Govt. Actions. Types of Rights...
        
        the first eight amendments in the Bill of Rights (e.g., the Eighth Amendment
        
        restrictions on the political process (e.g., the rights of voting, association, and free speech); and
        
        the rights of "discrete and insular minorities".
      - 1.PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS. Rogin v. Bensalem Township, 616 F.2d 680, 694 (3d Cir. 1980)
        
        (Right to be represented by counsel)
        
        Notice
        
        Hearing (make oral presentation)
        
        Impartial Tribunal
        
        Confront and Cross
        
        Discovery. Present evidence.
        
        Decision on record and why
- - - - JUDICIAL
        
        JUDICIAL IMMUNITY
        
        Stump v. Sparkman. Judge immune . SCOTUS 1978
        
        RANKIN v. HOWARD 1980
        see for quotes. Federal 9th circuit
        
        JurisdictionNot in the absence of Jurisdiction: of both subject and person
        
        When a judge knows that he lacks jurisdiction, or acts in the face of clearly valid statutes or case law expressly depriving him of jurisdiction, judicial immunity is lost.
        
        Personal Jurisdiction: Need ... Link Title
        
        4 more items...
        
        Subject Matter Jurisdiction
        Link Title
        
        Judicial Acts
        
        and ... the expectations of the parties, i. e., whether they dealt with the judge in his judicial capacity."
        
        "the nature of the act itself, i. e., whether it is a function normally performed by a judge,
        
        4 JUDGES
      - Legislative
      - Executive
      - Police Chiefs, Sherriffs, officers, deputies
    - - CLERK OF THE COURT and NORFOLK CIRCUIT COURT
        
        JUDGES X4
    - - LOCAL RULES OF NORFOLK COURT :
        
        CONTINUANCE can be ex parte without Notice. See Lannetti "Expectations"
        
        PRO SE CANNOT SCHEDULE HEARIN
        
        SEE Monell v. Dept. of Social Services of the City of New York, et al, 436 U.S. at 691, Courts can limit 1983 liabillity for local rules
        :no_entry:
        
        COMM. IN CHANCERY should have handled per NCC
  - - - Existence of conspiracy w/ state action
      - Deprivation of civil rights