holding that "[i]n order for a governmental unit to be liable under § 1983, the policy or custom must . . ., by the very terms of the statute, be a proximate cause of the constitutional violation"
Summary of this case from Akins v. Liberty Cnty.No. 80-5962.
February 23, 1981.
C.A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 628 F. 2d 297.
holding that "[i]n order for a governmental unit to be liable under § 1983, the policy or custom must . . ., by the very terms of the statute, be a proximate cause of the constitutional violation"
Summary of this case from Akins v. Liberty Cnty.holding that "[i]n order for a governmental unit to be liable under § 1983, the policy or custom must . . ., by the very terms of the statute, be a proximate cause of the constitutional violation"
Summary of this case from Price v. Jefferson Countydetermining that the reasons for appellate delay are analogous to the motives under the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial, and applying the four-factor test under Barker
Summary of this case from State v. Lewisassuming without deciding that delay of nearly two years violates due process
Summary of this case from State v. HarperFull title:RHEUARK ET AL. v. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, ET AL
Court:U.S.
Date published: Feb 23, 1981
Three other circuits have specifically rejected the Interboro doctrine. See Kohls v. NLRB, 629 F.2d 173 (D.C.…
Gaines v. MansonHarrison v. United States, 392 U.S. 219, 221 n. 4, 88 S.Ct. 2008, 20 L.Ed.2d 1047 (1968); Layne v. Gunter,…