Opinion ID: 218858
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The judgment requirement

Text: A grant of summary judgment or a trial verdict in favor of the plaintiff is no doubt a judgment. In contrast, a court's judicial pronouncement that the defendant has violated the Constitution does not create the requisite material alteration of the legal relationship between the parties . . . until the plaintiff becomes entitled to enforce a judgment. Farrar v. Hobby, 506 U.S. 103, 112-13, 113 S.Ct. 566, 121 L.Ed.2d 494 (1992). Thus, when an appellate court, in reversing the district court's dismissal of the plaintiff's claim, ruled that the plaintiff's constitutional rights were violated, the Supreme Court held that the plaintiff had not prevailed because there was no enforceable judgment. Hewitt v. Helms, 482 U.S. 755, 760, 107 S.Ct. 2672, 96 L.Ed.2d 654 (1987). The only relief to the plaintiff from this appellate victory was the moral satisfaction of knowing that a federal court concluded that his rights had been violated. Id. at 762, 107 S.Ct. 2672.