Document: 474 U.S. 327 106 S.Ct. 662 88 L.Ed.2d Roy E. DANIELS, Petitionerv.Andrew WILLIAMS. No. 84-5872. Argued Nov. 6, 1985. Decided Jan. 21, 1986. Syllabus Petitioner brought an action in Federal District Court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking to recover damages for injuries allegedly sustained when, while inmate a Richmond, Virginia, jail, he slipped on pillow negligently left stairway by respondent sheriff's deputy. contends that such negligence deprived him of his "liberty" interest freedom from bodily injury "without due process law" within the meaning Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment. The granted respondent's motion summary judgment, and Appeals affirmed. Held: is not implicated state official's negligent act causing unintended loss or life, liberty, property. Pp. 329-336. (a) was intended secure individual abuse power government officials. Far power, lack care, as alleged here, suggests no more than failure measure up conduct reasonable person. To hold caused deprivation would trivialize centuries-old principle law. Parratt v. Taylor, 451 527, 101 1908, 68 420 (1981) overruled extent it states otherwise. 329-332. (b) Constitution does purport supplant traditional tort law laying down rules regulate liability attend living together society. While speaks some facets relationship between jailers inmates, its protections are triggered care jailers. Jailers may owe special duty those their custody, but embrace concept. 332-336. 748 F.2d 229, REHNQUIST, J., delivered opinion Court, which BURGER, C.J., BRENNAN, WHITE, POWELL, O'CONNOR, JJ., joined. MARSHALL, concurred result. BLACKMUN, post, p. 336, STEVENS, filed opinions concurring judgment. Stephen Allan Saltzburg, Charlottesville, Va., petitioner. James Walter Hopper, respondent. Justice REHNQUIST Court. 1 In (1981), prisoner sued claiming prison officials had property without After deciding 1983 contains independent state-of-mind requirement, we concluded although petitioner been "deprived" Amendment, State's postdeprivation remedy provided due. Petitioner's claim this case, also rests Amendment "deprivation" official, leads us reconsider our statement "the loss, even though caused, amounted deprivation." Id., at 536-537, S.Ct., 1913. We conclude simply official 2 action, seeks back ankle when fell stairway. He claims that, city jail stairs respondent, correctional deputy stationed jail. Respondent's negligence, argument runs, injury, see Ingraham Wright, 430 651, 673, 97 1401, 1413, 51 711 (1977); because maintains entitled defense sovereign immunity suit, "adequate" remedy, cf. Hudson Palmer, 468 517, 534-536, 104 3194, 3204-3205, 82 393 (1984). Accordingly, liberty "due law." A panel Fourth Circuit affirmed, concluding if could make out court, be meaningful opportunity present case. 720 792 (1983). On rehearing, en banc affirmed judgment reasoning different panel. 229 First, 5-4 majority ruled infliction unlike Parratt, constitute any protected Clause. therefore believed mandated losses required. Second, court unanimously decided personal attributable officials, bar petitioner's State adequate remedy. Finally, 6-3 asserted rely suit. apparently fail Virginia 3 Because inconsistent approaches taken lower courts determining tortious rises level constitutional tort, Jackson Joliet, 465 1049, 1050, 1325, 79 (1984) (WHITE, dissenting denial certiorari) (collecting cases), apparent guidance certiorari. 469 1207, 105 2673, 86 692 (1985). now affirm. 4 certiorari, twice before, "to decide whether mere will support relief 1983." U.S., 532, 1911. examining language, legislative history, prior interpretations statute, criminal counterpart, 18 242, requirement necessary violation underlying right. 534-535, 1912. adhere conclusion. But given plaintiff must still prove right; depending right, merely enough claim. See, e.g., Arlington Heights Metropolitan Housing Dev. Corp., 429 252, 555, 50 450 (1977) (invidious discriminatory purpose required racial discrimination Equal Protection Clause); Estelle Gamble, 97, 105, 285, 291, 251 (1976) ("deliberate indifference" prisoner's serious illness sufficient cruel unusual punishment Eighth Amendment). 5 before Nebraska's all due, said hobby kit, "even [under Clause]." result, criticized "pass[ing] over" important question mind 547, 1919. argued acts property, actionable "wor[k] sense." 548, 1919 (emphasis original). Not only word "deprive" connote act, should "open federal lawsuits where there has affirmative power." 548-549, 1919-1920; id., 545, 1917 (Stewart, concurring) ("To kind seems trivialize, grossly distort intent Constitution"). Upon reflection, agree overrule 6 provides: "[N]or shall deprive person Historically, guarantee applied deliberate decisions E.g., Davidson New Orleans, 96 24 L.Ed. 616 (1878) (assessment real estate); Rochin California, 342 165, 72 205, 183 (1952) (stomach pumping); Bell Burson, 402 535, 91 1586, 29 90 (1971) (suspension driver's license); (paddling student); (intentional destruction inmate's property). No decision supported view constitutes This history reflects common-sense notion Clause, like forebear Magna Carta, Corwin, Doctrine Law Before Civil War, Harv.L.Rev. 366, 368 (1911), " 'intended arbitrary exercise powers government,' Hurtado 110 516, 111, 116, 28 232 (1884) (quoting Bank Columbia Okely, Wheat. (17 U.S.) 235, 244, 559 (1819)). See Wolff McDonnell, 418 539, 558, 94 2963, 2975, 41 935 (1974) ("The touchstone protection against government, Dent West 129 114, 123, 9 231, 233, 32 623 (1889)"); supra, 541 549, 1920 (POWELL, result). By requiring follow appropriate procedures agents "deprive property," promotes fairness decisions. And barring certain actions regardless used implement them, Rochin, serves prevent governmental being "used purposes oppression," Murray's Les Hoboken Land & Improvement Co., How. (59 272, 277, 15 372 (1856) (discussing Fifth 7 think custodians leaving stairs, mislaying quite remote concerns just discussed. 8 part generally designed allocate governing authority among Branches Government States, rights both Government. When dealing with document creates right prisoners sue created unsafe condition prison, bear Chief Marshall's admonition "we never forget, constitution expounding," McCulloch Maryland, 316, 407, 579 (1819) Our deals large governors governed, have previously rejected 'would font superimposed upon whatever systems already administered States,' Paul Davis, 424 693, 701, 1155, 1160, 47 405 (1976), quoted 544, 1917. tie facts case anything nature fact Richmond confined obviously relationship, see, McDonsupra, do believe "Medical malpractice become victim prisoner," 106, 292, "false imprisonment defendant official." Baker McCollan, 443 137, 146, 99 2689, 2695, 61 433 (1979). Where negligent, "no procedure compensation constitutionally required." result) added).1 10 That inflicted addressed United States say they raise significant legal lead creation protectible interests. enactment statutes, example, redressed.2 It reflection either breadth importance address same concerns. 11 can give rise "deprivation," makes several arguments, none find persuasive. states, "it almost 1983," cites example comply procedural requirements depriving good-time credit. relevant situation credit, hypothetically accord need rule possibility other provisions violated order hold, do, implicate 12 artful litigants, undeterred plead often able allege intentional deprivation. instant notes intention harming him. invitation "artful" pleading, contends, engender sticky (and needless) disputes over what fairly pleaded. What's more, complainants something questions about "more" negligence—intent, recklessness "gross negligence" required,3 indeed these elusive terms mean. Reply Brief ("what willful, wanton, reckless, gross mean" "left finest scholars puzzled"). accurate, observations carry day. first place, many branches abound nice distinctions troublesome thought nonetheless necessary: 13 "I trouble ourselves my depends differences degree. whole so soon civilized." LeRoy Fibre Co. Chicago, M. St. P.R. 340, 354, 34 415, 418, 58 631 (1914) (Holmes, partially concurring). 14 More important, difference one end spectrum—negligence—and other—intent—is abundantly clear. O. Holmes, Common (1923). event, decline effort simplify litigation. citing South 396, (1856), argues conduct, breached "special care" custody. 14. notes, "was Americans least enjoyed Englishmen crown." 672-673, 1413. Maryland sheriff breach ministerial provide safety How., 402-403. demands protect whom incarcerates exercising assure compensating them injury. 16 disagree. read diversity jurisdiction bond, stating principles common applicable case; cast law, been, since time rendered clause States. citation Wright common-law duties owed actors were somehow constitutionalized custody Restatement (Second) Torts 314A(4) (1965), reasons stated reject contention embraces alleges injured custodial Whatever general jurisprudence rightly invoke, afford 17 Affirmed. MARSHALL concurs 19 20 I concur dissent Cannon, 344, 668, 677 (1986). 21 judgments.* 22 Two similar two cases. Both seek suffered, part, characterize "deprivations liberty" invoke basis claims. 23 Prisoner Daniels newspaper pillows incarcerated; presence objects stairs. Robert suffered attacked another Jersey proved trial) authorities assault after written note expressing apprehension who ultimately assaulted petitioners cannot prevail 1983. agree, however, redefine Amendment,1 repudiate begin identifying precise advanced. source three kinds protection. incorporates specific defined Bill Rights. Thus, State, well Government, commands First2 Eighth3 Amendments; too, respect guarantees Fourth,4 Fifth,5 Sixth6 Amendments. substantive component, sometimes referred "substantive process," bars "regardless them." Ante, 331.7 Third, fair procedure, "procedural process": execute, imprison, fine giving trial,8 nor take providing safeguards.9 25 type effects availability relief. If category (a Rights), remedy.10 As explained Monroe Pape, 365 167, 81 473, 492 (1961), conclusion derives statute—the Ku Klux Act 1871—was violated, provision satisfy statute. 26 Similarly, second component Clause), remedy.11 For, category, less Rights, prohibits taking them," complete prohibited taken; then authorized language 27 third category—a fundamentally different. entirely legitimate—a every discharge teacher punish student—but nevertheless violate failing safeguards. gives citizen try happening, itself necessarily reflect "abuse" power. consequence mistake response. claim, unconstitutional; —without procedures. valid perhaps predeprivation hearing held,12 flawed.13 So unauthorized, raised challenges preventing redressing However, complaint objection—and claim—if include challenge fundamental consequence, clearly feasible,14 regime provides unobjectionable system recovery procedures, stated. cases categories—those violates right—if lacks colorable objection validity alleged.15 Petitioners' kind. Neither authorities' incorporated claims, instance, violated. process."16 Rather, kind: attack Jersey, respectively, redress physical corrections officers. 30 does, attempting fashion new definition term excluding scope. "state action" allegations negligence,17 harm surely qualifies "liberty." result "Deprivation," me, identifies, actor's mind, victim's infringement loss. stair negligently, recklessly, intentionally; resulting request ignored deliberately. each losing—being of—an aspect form action. 31 liberty. examine petitioners' prevail, demonstrate inadequate. Petitioners show contain defect unfair, basic forced occurred process. Daniels' essentially Parratt. determined claimed Although vigorously defeated found contrary, settled practice defer Courts law.18 true involved "property" involves "liberty," but, cases, nothing process" violation. definitionally impossible.19 And, remedies permitted established. straightforward application defeats 33 Davidson's raises specifically According Third Circuit, available statute employees prisoners. puts policy noncompensability types harm, play role, renders defective. not, itself, consequence. Those aspects defeat invalid, long unfairness operation. defenses contributory statutes limitations particular raising constitutionality disposing elects justify remedial There reason legislation enacted pursuant construed suggest doctrine unfair.20 immunity; challenged treatment nonprisoner prisoner, express comment differentiation. harms qualify deprivations am persuaded judgments. whether, suit render "inadequate" Tort Claims Act, Va.Code 8.01-195.1 et seq. (1984), applies accruing July 1, 1982, hence inapplicable Despite might pleaded, concedes most negligent. affords occasion consider negligence," trigger * [This Cannon al., 84-6470, 677. . ." Const., Amdt. Douglas Jeannette, 319 157, 63 877, 87 1324 (1943). Robinson 370 660, 1417, 758 (1962). Mapp Ohio, 367 643, 1684, 1081 (1961). Malloy Hogan, 378 84 1489, 653 (1964) (right compelled self-incrimination States); Benton 395 784, 89 2056, 707 (1969) double jeopardy States). Duncan Louisiana, 391 145, 1444, 491 (1968) jury trial Moore East Cleveland, 431 494, 1932, 52 531 Youngberg Romeo, 457 307, 102 2452, 73 (1982). Groppi Leslie, 404 496, 92 582, 632 (1972); re Oliver, 333 257, 499, 682 (1948). Fuentes Shevin, 407 67, 556 (1972). (1961) (§ violation); Smith Wade, 461 30, 103 1625, 75 (1983) violation). McNeese Board Education, 373 672, 83 1433, 1435, 622 (1963) "supplementary have"). Cf. 1917, (BLACKMUN, concurring); Roe 410 113, 93 705, 35 147 (1973). Loudermill Cleveland 470 1487, 494 (1985); Carey Piphus, 435 247, 98 1042, 55 252 (1978); Goss Lopez, 419 565, 95 729, 725 (1975). Groppi, supra. Logan Zimmerman Brush 455 422, 436, 1148, 1158, 71 265 (1982) (post-deprivation inadequate itself"); 156, 2700, (1979) (STEVENS, dissenting). 533, 3203, ("[W]hen effected through random unauthorized employee, 'impracticable' know occur"); (1981). 543-544, 1916-17. explicitly disavows ("[P]etitioner frames here purely process"). At oral argument, counsel did pursuing Tr. Oral Arg. 84-5872, 22. viewed 230, n. (CA4 1984) ("There violation"), dispute characterization petition certiorari brief merits. arguments obligations ante, 335-336, recognized Constitution. circumstances, ex rel. Miller Twomey, 479 719-721 (CA7 1973) (analyzing officials' responsibilities assaults Amendment), cert. denied sub nom. Gutierrez Department Public Safety Illinois, 414 1146, 900, 39 (1974). Respondents state-action sentence, 13, n., bare reference mount undisturbed finding Haring Prosise, 462 306, 314, 8, 2368, 2373, 76 595 (1983); Leroy Great Western 173, 181, 11, 2710, 2715, 464 (1979); Bishop Wood, 426 341, 345-347, 2074, 2077-79, 48 684 (1976); Propper Clark, 337 472, 486-487, 69 1333, 1341-42, 1480 (1949). borders absurd determine officer engage conduct. Martinez 444 100 553, 62 481 (1980), held California's operated arising course, mean guarantee; cannot, Martinez, 284, quoting Hampton 484 602, 607 1973), denied, 415 917, 471

Category: 1