Settlement Alerts:

$9,250,000 Defamation Case Win Against The New York Times 8/26
$6,800,000 Wrongful Death 8/26
$81,000,000 Children Born Addicted (as part of the trial team)
$18,000,000 Product Liability 12/19
$13,000,000 Medical Malpractice – Sexual Assault 8/23
$225,000 Civil Litigation 7/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$30,000 Medical Malpractice 7/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$42,690 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$2,759,223 Opioid Litigation 6/26
$70,000 Medical Malpractice 6/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 6/26
$100,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$420,000 Jail Litigation 5/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$650,000 Jail Litigation 5/26
$46,937 Opioid Litigation 5/26
$150,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 5/26
$285,000 Medical Malpractice 4/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Personal Injury 3/26
$40,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$32,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$42,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 1/26
$30,000 Personal Injury 1/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 12/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 12/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$77,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$26,668 Personal Injury 9/25
$25,000 Personal Injury 9/25
$97,500 Personal Injury 9/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$100,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 8/25
$100,000 Wrongful Death 7/25
$45,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/25
$200,000 Wrongful Death 6/25
$1,200,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 6/25
$200,000 Slip & Fall 6/25
$26,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/25
$800,000 Jail Litigation 5/25
$925,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$125,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$700,000 Jail Litigation 4/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$125,000 Personal Injury 4/25
$20,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/25
$1,300,000 Jail Litigation 2/25
$210,000 Slip & Fall 2/25
$100,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/25
$975,000 Medical Malpractice 1/25
$4,000,000 Jail Litigation 1/25

$9,250,000 Defamation & False Light 8/26
$6,800,000 Wrongful Death 8/26
$81,000,000 Children Born Addicted (as part of the trial team)
$18,000,000 Product Liability 12/19
$13,000,000 Medical Malpractice – Sexual Assault 8/23
$225,000 Civil Litigation 7/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$30,000 Medical Malpractice 7/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$42,690 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/26
$2,759,223 Opioid Litigation 6/26
$70,000 Medical Malpractice 6/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 6/26
$100,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$420,000 Jail Litigation 5/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/26
$650,000 Jail Litigation 5/26
$46,937 Opioid Litigation 5/26
$150,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 5/26
$285,000 Medical Malpractice 4/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 3/26
$50,000 Personal Injury 3/26
$40,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$32,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/26
$42,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 1/26
$30,000 Personal Injury 1/26
$50,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 12/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 12/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$77,500 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 11/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$26,668 Personal Injury 9/25
$25,000 Personal Injury 9/25
$97,500 Personal Injury 9/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 9/25
$100,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 8/25
$100,000 Wrongful Death 7/25
$45,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 7/25
$200,000 Wrongful Death 6/25
$1,200,000 Wrongful Death – Jail Litigation 6/25
$200,000 Slip & Fall 6/25
$26,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/25
$800,000 Jail Litigation 5/25
$925,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 5/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$125,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$700,000 Jail Litigation 4/25
$25,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 4/25
$125,000 Personal Injury 4/25
$20,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/25
$1,300,000 Jail Litigation 2/25
$210,000 Slip & Fall 2/25
$100,000 Motor Vehicle Accident 2/25
$975,000 Medical Malpractice 1/25
$4,000,000 Jail Litigation 1/25

CALL US NOW

5-Star Google Rating•BBB Rating: A+•West Virginia State Bar•The United States District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of West Virginia•The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals•The United States Supreme Court•American Association for Justice•Opioid Justice Team•Trial Lawyers Care•West Virginia Association for Justice•5-Star Google Rating•BBB Rating: A+•West Virginia State Bar•The United States District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of West Virginia•The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals•The United States Supreme Court•American Association for Justice•Opioid Justice Team•Trial Lawyers Care•West Virginia Association for Justice

Section 1983 Civil Rights Claims Lawyer in MacArthur

Protecting Civil Liberties

Guide to Section 1983 Civil Rights Claims

Section 1983 claims allow people in MacArthur and across West Virginia to seek remedies when public officials or government entities deprive them of rights guaranteed by the Constitution. These cases commonly involve allegations such as excessive force, unlawful arrest, or violations of due process and free speech. Pursuing a civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 can lead to monetary damages and orders that change official behavior, and it often requires careful factual investigation, evidence preservation, and courtroom advocacy. If you believe your constitutional rights were violated by a state actor, timely action and clear documentation are important to protect your claim.

Residents of MacArthur and nearby communities can expect personal attention from a local firm that handles civil rights matters alongside broader personal injury work. Stephen New & Associates in Beckley represents clients who face deprivation of constitutional rights by police officers, correctional staff, or municipal policies. We help people understand whether a Section 1983 claim is appropriate, what remedies may be available, and what steps to take immediately to preserve evidence. For questions or to discuss a possible claim, the office can be reached at 304-355-5565 to arrange an initial consultation focused on your situation.

Benefits of Pursuing a Section 1983 Claim

Filing a Section 1983 lawsuit can provide important remedies and accountability when government actors violate constitutional rights. Plaintiffs may obtain compensatory awards for physical or emotional harm, punitive damages in some circumstances, and injunctive relief to change unlawful practices or departmental policies. Beyond individual relief, successful claims can prompt reforms that reduce the risk of future abuses by public agencies. Even when monetary recovery is limited, the process often brings evidence into the open, creates a formal record of misconduct, and can drive systemic change that benefits the broader community over time.

About Stephen New & Associates

Stephen New & Associates is a Beckley-based personal injury law firm that represents clients throughout Raleigh County and surrounding West Virginia communities. The firm handles a range of matters including Section 1983 civil rights claims, medical malpractice, catastrophic injury, and wrongful death cases. When representing people who allege constitutional violations by public officials, the practice focuses on building a thorough factual record, coordinating investigations, and preparing for litigation when necessary. Clients receive direct communication about case strategy and practical guidance on protecting their rights from initial intake through resolution.

Understanding Section 1983 Claims

A Section 1983 claim allows an individual to sue state or local officials who, acting under color of state law, deprive that person of rights secured by the Constitution or federal law. Typical claims allege violations such as unlawful searches, excessive force, denial of due process, or retaliation for protected speech. To succeed, a plaintiff must link the alleged harm to a government actor and show the conduct caused a deprivation of a federally protected right. These cases often require testimony, body-worn camera footage, incident reports, and other documentation to establish both the facts and the legal basis for relief.

Remedies in Section 1983 litigation can include monetary awards and court orders to stop unlawful practices. Defendants commonly raise defenses such as qualified immunity, and some claims may implicate municipal liability rules when policies or customs caused the violation. Time limits for filing and prompt preservation of evidence are important to keep a claim viable. Because procedures and defenses can be complex, people pursuing these claims should act soon after the incident to gather witness accounts, preserve physical and digital evidence, and understand the timeline and litigation steps ahead.

Need More Information?

Key Terms and Glossary

Section 1983 (42 U.S.C. § 1983)

Section 1983 is a federal statute that permits an individual to bring a civil suit when someone acting under state authority deprives them of rights protected by the Constitution or federal law. It applies to actions by police, corrections officers, and other government employees, as well as to municipal policies in certain circumstances. The statute does not create new constitutional rights, but it provides a federal remedy when existing rights are violated. A successful Section 1983 claim can result in monetary compensation or court orders aimed at preventing future violations.

Qualified Immunity

Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that can shield government officials from liability for actions taken while performing their official duties, unless the conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. It is a common defense in Section 1983 cases and often becomes a central issue early in litigation. Overcoming qualified immunity typically requires showing that the official’s actions were objectively unreasonable in light of settled law and the facts existing at the time of the incident.

Municipal Liability (Monell)

Municipal liability under Monell doctrine holds that a local government or its policymakers can be liable under Section 1983 when a constitutional violation results from an official policy, a widespread custom, or a failure to train or supervise employees. Not every mistake or isolated incident establishes municipal liability; the wrongdoing must be tied to an official practice or persistent pattern. Claims against municipalities require proof that a policy or custom caused the constitutional harm and that the municipality’s actions reflected deliberate indifference to the rights at issue.

Injunctive Relief

Injunctive relief is a court-ordered remedy that requires a public agency or official to take specific actions or to stop particular practices that violate constitutional rights. Unlike monetary damages, injunctions seek to prevent ongoing or future harm by changing how an agency operates. Plaintiffs in Section 1983 cases may seek injunctions to address patterns of misconduct, reform policies, or secure access to necessary medical care in detention settings, and courts weigh the public interest and practicality when determining appropriate injunctive measures.

PRO TIPS

Preserve Critical Evidence

After an incident involving a potential civil rights violation, preserve any available evidence immediately, including photos, videos, clothing, and medical records, and make copies where possible. Collect contact information for witnesses and write down a detailed account of what happened while memories remain fresh, noting times and locations. Taking swift steps to secure evidence and documentation increases the likelihood that a later claim will be supported by reliable proof and helps establish an accurate timeline of events.

Document All Details

Keep a consistent and thorough record of every step related to the incident, including interactions with law enforcement, medical treatment, and any official reports you receive or request. Documenting dates, names, badge numbers, and statements can be invaluable when reconstructing the events and demonstrating patterns of conduct. Detailed documentation supports credibility, aids investigation, and helps legal counsel assess the strength and focus of a potential Section 1983 claim.

Contact a Lawyer Promptly

Reach out to a local civil rights lawyer as soon as you can so they can advise you on evidence preservation, investigative steps, and litigation deadlines that may affect your case. Early involvement allows counsel to secure time-sensitive materials, obtain witness statements, and evaluate whether administrative or internal complaint processes should be pursued. Prompt legal guidance helps ensure your rights are protected while important facts remain accessible and before critical filing deadlines expire.

Comparing Legal Options for Civil Rights Claims

When a Comprehensive Approach Is Needed:

Complex Liability and Multiple Defendants

Some Section 1983 matters involve multiple actors, overlapping municipal policies, or state and local defendants whose interactions complicate causation and liability issues. A comprehensive approach coordinates factual investigation, legal research, and strategic litigation planning to identify all responsible parties and the most effective routes to relief. When claims implicate institutional practices, systemic misconduct, or layered defenses, integrated legal work helps ensure each element of the claim is supported with the necessary evidence and advocacy.

Defeating Qualified Immunity Defenses

Overcoming qualified immunity often requires detailed factual development and careful comparison of the conduct at issue with clearly established legal precedents, and a comprehensive legal strategy addresses both factual and doctrinal challenges. Counsel must identify comparable case law, document granular facts that demonstrate unreasonable official conduct, and present persuasive arguments that the right was clearly established. Where immunity defenses are likely, a coordinated legal response increases the chance of surviving early motions and moving the case forward to discovery and trial.

When a Limited Approach May Be Sufficient:

Clear Facts and Strong Evidence

When video, multiple credible witnesses, and contemporaneous documentation plainly show an unconstitutional act, a more focused and limited legal approach may efficiently secure relief without broad institutional claims. In such cases, targeted litigation aimed at the individual wrongdoer or a specific discrete policy often suffices to obtain damages or narrow injunctive relief. A streamlined strategy can reduce costs and speed resolution while still holding the responsible party accountable when the factual record is straightforward and compelling.

Narrow Relief Sought

If a claimant seeks only a narrowly defined remedy, such as correction of a single administrative decision or reinstatement in a particular circumstance, the scope of litigation may be limited to those discrete issues rather than a broad policy challenge. A focused approach can be effective when the requested relief does not require systemic remedies or extensive discovery into departmental practices. Choosing a limited path aligns resources with the client’s goals while preserving options to expand the case later if additional violations or patterns emerge.

Common Circumstances for Section 1983 Claims

Unlawful Arrest or Excessive Force

Allegations of unlawful arrest or excessive force are frequent bases for Section 1983 claims when an individual believes officers used unreasonable physical force or lacked legal justification for an arrest, and these matters often turn on detailed factual evidence such as body camera footage and witness testimony. Such claims seek to show that the conduct violated constitutional protections against unreasonable seizures and may lead to both compensatory relief and changes in law enforcement practices.

Conditions of Confinement

Section 1983 litigation can address inhumane or unsafe conditions in jails, prisons, or detention facilities when confinement practices deprive detained persons of basic needs or safety, and these claims often involve medical records, facility logs, and inspections. Remedies in such cases may include monetary compensation and court-ordered reforms to improve medical care, sanitation, or supervision to prevent future harm to those in custody.

Violation of Free Speech or Due Process

Claims also arise when government actions unconstitutionally restrict speech, expression, or procedural protections in administrative or disciplinary settings, and such cases require analysis of the context and the applicable constitutional standard. Successful claims can restore rights, reverse punitive actions, and secure orders that prevent similar violations of civil liberties going forward.

MacArthur Civil Rights Attorney

Why Hire Stephen New & Associates for Section 1983 Claims

Stephen New & Associates provides local representation to clients in MacArthur and Raleigh County who seek accountability for constitutional violations by government actors. The firm combines courtroom readiness with practical steps to preserve evidence and develop persuasive factual records. Clients benefit from hands-on communication, timely case updates, and legal advocacy aimed at achieving damage awards or injunctive relief where appropriate. For residents concerned about interactions with police, corrections staff, or municipal agencies, the firm offers tailored guidance and a clear plan for moving a claim forward.

The practice advises on investigative priorities, evidentiary needs, and legal options while assisting clients through administrative processes and litigation when necessary. Stephen New & Associates handles related personal injury and wrongful death matters as well, which often intersect with civil rights claims when negligent or harmful conduct by state actors results in serious harm. To discuss a potential Section 1983 matter or to learn more about available remedies, contact the Beckley office at 304-355-5565 for a consultation focused on your circumstances.

Request a Free Consultation Today

People Also Search For

Section 1983 lawyer MacArthur

civil rights attorney MacArthur WV

police misconduct lawyer Raleigh County

Monell claim MacArthur

qualified immunity defense West Virginia

excessive force attorney Beckley

civil rights lawsuit WV

constitutional rights lawyer MacArthur

Related Services

FAQS

What is a Section 1983 claim and who can bring one?

Section 1983 is a federal law that allows individuals to sue state or local officials who, while acting under color of state law, deprive them of rights protected by the Constitution or federal statutes. Typical plaintiffs include people who allege unlawful arrest, excessive force, denial of medical care in custody, or other deprivations of liberty or procedural protections. The claim is focused on the conduct of public actors rather than private disputes, and it provides a path to seek damages and, in some cases, injunctive relief to correct ongoing violations. Anyone who believes a government employee or agency caused a constitutional violation can consider a Section 1983 claim, but success depends on linking the conduct to a protected right and demonstrating causation. The litigation can involve both individual defendants and municipal entities if policies or customs contributed to the violation. Early fact-gathering and legal assessment are important to determine whether a claim is viable and what defendants should be named to effectively pursue relief.

How long do I have to file a Section 1983 lawsuit in West Virginia?

Federal courts generally borrow the state’s statute of limitations for personal injury claims when determining the timeliness of a Section 1983 action, meaning deadlines can vary and adherence is important to avoid dismissal. In West Virginia, state law deadlines and tolling rules may apply, and federal procedural rules also affect when a suit must be filed, so calculating the correct limitation period requires careful review of the facts and the date of injury or discovery. Waiting too long can forfeit legal rights, so timely consultation and action are recommended. Because filing deadlines and tolling rules can turn on technical legal points such as when the plaintiff knew or should have known of the injury, it is wise to preserve evidence and speak with counsel promptly. Even when the limitations period appears short, there may be exceptions or alternate paths for relief depending on the specifics of the case. Prompt review allows legal counsel to identify applicable timelines and take steps to protect the claim while evidence remains available.

What kinds of remedies are available in Section 1983 cases?

Remedies in Section 1983 cases can include monetary compensation for physical injury, emotional harm, and lost wages, as well as punitive damages in certain circumstances where defendants acted with malice or reckless disregard for rights. Plaintiffs may also seek injunctive relief that requires governmental authorities to stop unlawful practices, change policies, or provide necessary services, which can address ongoing harm to an individual or a broader class of people. The exact remedies available depend on the nature of the violation and the relief requested in the complaint. Courts consider several factors when awarding relief, including the severity of the constitutional deprivation, the impact on the plaintiff, and whether injunctive measures are necessary to prevent further violations. Damages awards are shaped by the evidence of harm and causation, while injunctions require demonstrating that prospective relief is appropriate and workable. Recovering meaningful relief often requires thorough factual development and persuasive presentation of the legal basis for each remedy sought.

What is qualified immunity and how does it affect my case?

Qualified immunity protects government actors from liability for actions taken in the course of their official duties unless the conduct violated rights that were clearly established at the time. The doctrine frequently becomes a central issue in Section 1983 litigation because it can justify early dismissal if courts determine that the law was not sufficiently clear in the particular circumstances. Overcoming qualified immunity typically requires showing that a reasonable official would have understood the action to be unlawful based on precedent or established principles. Addressing qualified immunity therefore involves both factual and legal analysis: documenting what occurred in detail and identifying controlling case law that demonstrates the unlawfulness of the conduct. Courts evaluate whether the right was clearly established in the context of the facts, and careful presentation of comparable decisions and precise factual parallels can be necessary to defeat immunity early in the case and allow discovery and trial to proceed.

Can I sue a city or county under Section 1983?

Yes, municipalities and local governments can be sued under Section 1983 when a constitutional violation results from an official policy, custom, or failure to train employees that amounts to deliberate indifference to individuals’ rights. These claims require more than proof of a single employee’s wrongdoing; the plaintiff must show that a governmental policy or a pattern of misconduct caused the deprivation. Municipal liability often necessitates additional factual investigation into hiring practices, training manuals, prior incidents, and internal policies to link municipal decisions to the alleged harm. Proving municipal liability can be complex, but establishing that a policy or persistent failure caused constitutional violations can yield broader remedies, including systemic reforms and injunctive relief. Counsel may pursue both individual officer claims and municipal claims when the facts suggest policy-level responsibility, and the combined approach can address both compensatory needs and institutional changes that reduce the chance of future violations.

How should I preserve evidence after an alleged rights violation?

After an incident, preserving evidence should be a top priority. Keep and copy any recordings, photographs, medical records, clothing, or other physical items that relate to the event, and obtain witness statements and contact details while memories are fresh. Request body-worn camera footage or other official recordings promptly, as agencies may not retain this material indefinitely, and document communication with officials and healthcare providers to create a clear timeline of events. Timely preservation also includes limiting public posts about the incident and avoiding statements that could complicate later claims. Seek legal advice early so counsel can send preservation letters, file appropriate requests for records, and advise on steps to secure critical documentation. Early action increases the likelihood that relevant evidence remains accessible and usable in support of a claim.

Will my case go to trial or is settlement common in these claims?

Many Section 1983 claims resolve through settlement, often after some period of investigation and negotiation, but some cases proceed to trial when settlement is not possible or when injunctive relief and public accountability are central goals. Settlement outcomes vary widely based on the facts, liability risks, and the strength of available evidence. Parties may reach agreements that include monetary compensation, policy changes, or other corrective steps without a court trial when both sides see value in resolving the dispute outside of litigation. Whether a matter goes to trial depends on the client’s objectives, the willingness of defendants to negotiate, and the solidity of legal and factual claims. Preparing a case for trial often strengthens settlement leverage, and counsel will typically assess whether mediation or negotiation can achieve the client’s goals more efficiently than litigation while preserving the option to proceed to trial if necessary.

Can internal police investigations affect my civil claim?

Internal police or agency investigations can produce reports and findings that may be relevant to a civil rights claim, but these processes operate under different standards and may not fully address legal liability. Administrative results can inform a civil case by uncovering documents, timelines, or witness statements, yet they do not replace the need for independent civil discovery and legal proof. It’s important to collect and preserve any materials generated by internal investigations while also pursuing parallel legal avenues to develop the record for federal court claims. In some instances, unfavorable administrative findings may support a civil claim, while favorable internal conclusions do not necessarily preclude a plaintiff from pursuing federal remedies. Civil litigation allows broader discovery powers and legal mechanisms to obtain evidence, so relying solely on administrative outcomes can leave significant issues unexamined. Legal counsel can assess how administrative materials fit into the broader proof strategy and seek necessary records through formal discovery if litigation proceeds.

Do I need witnesses or video to succeed in a Section 1983 claim?

While witnesses and video greatly strengthen many Section 1983 claims, their absence does not automatically preclude recovery if other credible evidence supports the claim. Photographs, medical records, official reports, and consistent witness testimony can collectively establish a persuasive narrative of what occurred. Each piece of evidence contributes to building causation and showing that constitutional protections were violated, and courts evaluate the totality of the record when deciding claims. When direct video is not available, other documentation and testimony become more important, including contemporaneous statements, injury documentation, and expert analysis of injuries or procedures when appropriate. Promptly collecting and preserving what evidence is available and identifying witnesses who can corroborate events increases the likelihood of meaningful legal resolution even without camera footage.

How can Stephen New & Associates help with a Section 1983 claim?

Stephen New & Associates helps clients with Section 1983 matters by assessing the facts, advising on evidence preservation, pursuing records from public agencies, and developing a legal strategy tailored to the client’s goals. The firm assists with both individual claims against officers and municipal claims addressing policies or patterns of misconduct, preparing complaints, handling discovery, and advocating for monetary and injunctive relief where appropriate. Local presence in Beckley and familiarity with regional courts and procedures supports practical case handling for clients in MacArthur and Raleigh County. The firm’s approach includes explaining procedural timelines, potential defenses such as qualified immunity, and options for resolving disputes through negotiation, mediation, or trial. Clients receive guidance on communicating with agencies, protecting privacy, and understanding the implications of various remedies. For immediate assistance or to discuss a possible claim, the office can be contacted at 304-355-5565 to arrange an initial consultation focused on the specific circumstances.

All Services in

Explore our complete legal services