Skip to main content

Head-to-head

Anthony Lewis v. HCA Florida Lawnwood Hospital vs. Angela W. DeBose v. Florida Polytechnic University Board of Trustees vs. Steve Snyder, et al., Petitioners v. Village of Luckey, Ohio

Civil Rights cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.

Relationship

Shared issue
Civil Rights
Why compared
Reviewed Civil Rights tags connect these current-term public cases.

Questions presented

Anthony Lewis v. HCA Florida Lawnwood Hospital
1. Whether the district court deprived Dr. Lewis and his counsel of their statutory or procedural right to amend the First Amended Complaint without leave of court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). 2. Whether the district court violated Dr. Lewis’s and his counsel’s First Amendment right to petition pursuant to the holding in NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415 (1963) (First Amendment) and its progeny. 3. Whether the district court violated Dr. Lewis’s and his counsel’s Thirteenth Amendment right to petition pursuant to the holding in Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3, 22 (1883) (Thirteenth Amendment; Civil Rights Act of 1866) and its progeny.
Angela W. DeBose v. Florida Polytechnic University Board of Trustees
1. Whether the State of Florida violates the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment by imposing a prohibitive $1,000,000.00 security bond as a condition for a pro se litigant to maintain a civil action, thereby creating an insurmountable financial barrier to court access. See Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371 (1971). 2. Whether a state appellate system violates the Fourteenth Amendment when it utilizes unelaborated decisions to insulate potentially void lower court orders from meaningful judicial review, effectively creating a jurisdictional void for litigants. See Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 U.S. 422 (1982).
Steve Snyder, et al., Petitioners v. Village of Luckey, Ohio
1. Whether this Court’s Opinion in Knick, supra, permits a federal cause of action against a municipal entity for an uncompensated physical taking when the municipal entity has materially impaired the value and precluded the alienability of the Petitioners’ property. 2. Whether the actions of the Village in singling out the Petitioners’ property and engaging in concerted actions to prevent its sale at auction are sufficient to state a claim for violation of Petitioners’ rights to due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.

Sources

  • Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.