Torts Commons^™

Nominal Damages As Vindication, Sadie Blanchard

Journal Articles

A recent Supreme Court decision inspired a resurgence of interest in an old mystery: how can nominal damages vindicate a plaintiff for past harm? The Court relied on the longstanding common law practice of entitling a plaintiff to sue for violation of her rights, even without demonstrating harm in fact, and to recover nominal damages. Courts have long asserted that awarding nominal damages in such suits vindicates the plaintiff. But they have not explained just how awarding $1 provides vindication, and serious observers scoff at the idea that it does. This Article offers a theory of vindication through nominal damages …

Going Rogue: The Supreme Court's Newfound Hostility To Policy-Based Bivens Claims, Joanna C. Schwartz, Alexander A. Reinert, James E. Pfander

Articles

In Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (2017), the Supreme Court held that a proposed Bivens remedy was subject to an exacting special factors analysis when the claim arises in a “new context.” In Ziglar itself, the Court found the context of the plaintiffs’ claims to be “new” because, in the Court’s view, they challenged “large-scale policy decisions concerning the conditions of confinement imposed on hundreds of prisoners.” Bivens claims for damages caused by unconstitutional policies, the Court suggested, were inappropriate.

This Essay critically examines the Ziglar Court’s newfound hostility to policy-based Bivens claims. We show that an …

Qualified Immunity And Constitutional Structure, Katherine Mims Crocker

Michigan Law Review

A range of scholars has subjected qualified immunity to a wave of criticism— and for good reasons. But the Supreme Court continues to apply the doctrine in ever more aggressive ways. By advancing two claims, this Article seeks to make some sense of this conflict and to suggest some thoughts toward a resolution.

First, while the Court has offered and scholars have rejected several rationales for the doctrine, layering in an account grounded in structural constitutional concerns provides a historically richer and analytically thicker understanding of the current qualified-immunity regime. For suits against federal officials, qualified immunity acts as a …

The Role Of Fault In § 1983 Municipal Liability, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

Under Monell v. Department of Social Services, local governments are not vicariously liable for constitutional violations committed by their employees. Those governments, however, are liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations committed by "policymaking" officials. In the face of these two principles, courts have struggled with cases in which an underling commits a constitutional violation and the claim of municipal liability is based on a policymaker's failure to prevent it. The government can be liable in these "indirect-effect" cases for a policymaker's "deliberate indifference" to safeguarding constitutional rights, a standard that demands an even greater showing of culpability than …

Qualified Immunity And Statutory Interpretation: A Response To William Baude, Hillel Y. Levin, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

In his article, Is Qualified Immunity Unlawful?, Professor Baude argues that the doctrine of qualified immunity under section 1983 is unlawful because the doctrine did not exist at the time section 1983 was enacted. We disagree. Section 1983 is a common law statute. Consequently, its meaning and application was not fixed at the time of original passage. In this article, we explain why.

Although we are sympathetic to Professor Baude’s implicit policy-based critique of the doctrine of qualified immunity, we believe his analysis is flawed. The better and more likely way to improve the doctrine is through the common law …

Attorney’S Fees, Nominal Damages, And Section 1983 Litigation, Thomas A. Eaton, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

Can plaintiffs recover attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 when they establish constitutional violations but recover only nominal damages or low compensatory damages? Some federal appellate courts have concluded that no fee, or a severely reduced fee, should be awarded in such circumstances. This position, which we call the “low award, low fee” approach, rests primarily on the Supreme Court’s 1992 opinion in Farrar v. Hobby.

We argue that a “low award, low fee” approach is misguided for two main reasons. First, the majority opinion in Farrar is fragmented and the factual record is opaque regarding what and how …

Intramilitary Tort Immunity: A Constitutional Justification , Kevin M. Fillo

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Law, The Westfall Act, And The Nature Of The Bivens Question, Carlos Manuel Vázquez, Stephen I. Vladeck

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In a number of recent cases touching to varying degrees on national security, different courts of appeals have applied a strong presumption against recognition of a Bivens cause of action. In each of these cases, the courts’ approach was based on the belief that the creation of a cause of action is a legislative function and that the courts would be usurping Congress’s role if they recognized a Bivens action without legislative authorization. Thus, faced with a scenario where they believed that the remedial possibilities were either "Bivens or nothing," these courts of appeals chose nothing.

The concerns that …

"Indifferent [Towards] Indifference:" Post-Deshaney Accountability For Social Services Agencies When A Child Is Injured Or Killed Under Their Protective Watch, Carolina D. Watts

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Saucier Qualified Immunity Experiment: An Empirical Analysis, Nancy Leong

Pepperdine Law Review

This paper provides an empirical analysis of the impact of the approach to qualified immunity that the Supreme Court first suggested in Siegert v. Gilley and later made mandatory in Saucier v. Katz. That approach dictates that lower courts should resolve constitutional issues prior to deciding whether a government official is shielded from liability by qualified immunity. A primary justification for this sequencing approach is the notion that where courts decide that constitutional law is not clearly established, and thus qualified immunity is available, future defendants can also escape liability for the same behavior. But the empirical analysis provided in …

Second Thoughts On Damages For Wrongful Convictions, Lawrence Rosenthal

Lawrence Rosenthal

After the DNA-inspired wave of exonerations of recent years, there has been widespread support for expanding the damages remedies available to those who have been wrongfully accused or convicted. This article argues that the case for providing such compensation is deeply problematic under the justificatory theories usually advanced in support of either no-fault or fault-based liability. Although a regime of strict liability is sometimes thought justifiable to as a means of creating an economic incentive to scale back conduct thought highly likely to produce social losses, it is far from clear that the risk of error is so high in …

Scott V. Harris And The Role Of The Jury In Constitutional Litigation, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

Suits brought under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 to recover damages for excessive force by the police bear some resemblance to common law tort litigation, since the key Fourth Amendment issue is whether the force was 'unreasonable.' In ordinary negligence law the jury typically decides whether an actor has exercised reasonable care, even when there is no dispute as to the facts. In section 1983 litigation the federal courts are badly split on the allocation of decision making between judge and jury, sometimes even within a particular circuit. The Supreme Court recently faced the judge-jury issue in Scott v. Harris, where …

Alternative State Remedies In Constitutional Torts, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

In recent years, a subtle shift in constitutional tort doctrine has quietly begun to take root. In Bivens actions, the Supreme Court has recently implied that constitutional tort plaintiffs must seek relief under state law when it is available, rather than invoke their federal constitutional rights. This marks a dramatic change from past practices. For much of the twentieth century, a central premise in the constitutional tort field has been that the federal remedy is "supplementary" to the state remedy; constitutional tort plaintiffs have therefore been permitted to seek a remedy under federal law without regard to the availability of …

Limiting A Constitutional Tort Without Probably Cause: First Amendment Retaliatory Arrest After Hartman, Colin P. Watson

Michigan Law Review

Federal law provides a cause of action for individuals who are the target of adverse state action taken in retaliation for their exercise of First Amendment rights. Because these constitutional torts are "easy to allege and hard to disprove," they raise difficult questions concerning the proper balance between allowing meaningful access to the courts and protecting government agents from frivolous and vexatious litigation. In its recent decision in Hartman v. Moore, the U.S. Supreme Court tipped the scales in favor of the state in one subset of First Amendment retaliation actions by holding that plaintiffs in actions for retaliatory …

Which Comes First In Federal Court, The Chicken Or The Baby Chicks: The Unavailability Of Federal Remedies For Spousal Consortium Claims Under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, Michelle N. Ferreri

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

The "Order-Of-Battle" In Constitutional Litigation, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

This article examines and defends a procedural rule that figures prominently in constitutional tort litigation, has drawn sharp criticism from the federal judiciary, and seems to have lost the support of at least four sitting Supreme Court Justices. In order to recover damages, plaintiffs must not only prove a constitutional violation but also fend off assertions of official immunity. In ruling on motions to dismiss the complaint and motions for summary judgment, a preliminary question is the sequence in which the two issues should be addressed-a problem the Justices call the "order-of-battle." Morse v. Frederick, the "Bong Hits Jesus" case, …

A Theory Of Government Damages Liability: Torts, Constitutional Torts, And Takings, Lawrence Rosenthal

ExpressO

Theories of tort liability generally fall within two broad camps: the instrumentalists claim that tort liability promotes efficient investments in safety by cutting into the revenues of those who under-invest in safety; and the advocates of corrective justice claim that tort liability embodies a moral obligation of culpable parties to bear losses for which they are fairly considered responsible. Neither theory offers much support for government tort liability. Unlike private tortfeasors, the government’s objective is not profit maximization; it responds to political and not market discipline. Thus, the instrumental justification for tort liability is wanting in the public sector. As …

Deliberate Indifference Or Not: That Is The Question In The Third Circuit Jail Suicide Case Of Woloszyn V. Lawrence County, Shevon I. Scarafile

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Government Corruption And The Right Of Access To Courts, Una A. Kim

Michigan Law Review

This Note addresses the question left unanswered in Harbury: whether these denial of access-to-courts cases, which Justice Souter termed "backward-looking" access claims, are valid exercises of a constitutional right. Backward-looking access claims such as Harbury's differ from traditional denial of access-to-courts claims in that their aim is not to remove impediments to bringing causes of action in the future. Rather, backward-looking access claims allege that a suit that could have been filed in the past was not brought or was not litigated effectively, because access to the courts was at that time denied or obstructed by government officials. …

Why Constitutional Torts Deserve A Book Of Their Own, Michael Wells, Thomas A. Eaton, Sheldon H. Nahmod

Seattle University Law Review

Over thirty years ago, Marshall Shapo coined the term "constitutional tort" to denote a suit brought against an official, charging a constitutional violation and seeking damages.' In the years since Shapo's pathbreaking article, the number of such suits has grown exponentially.' The suits have generated a host of new substantive and remedial issues, yet conventional casebooks on constitutional law and federal courts give little attention to the area. That Professor Shapiro had four books to include in his review of “Civil Rights” casebooks in the Seattle University Law Review is some indication of a demand for teaching materials currently unmet …

Constitutional Torts, Common Law Torts, And Due Process Of Law, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Government officers may harm persons in many ways. When an official inflicts a physical injury, causes emotional distress, publishes defamatory statements, or initiates a malicious prosecution, the victim's traditional recourse is a tort suit brought under common law or statutory principles. But an alternative to ordinary tort may also be available. The growth of damage remedies for constitutional violations in the decades following Monroe v. Pape has encouraged litigants to frame their cases as breaches of the Constitution. These litigants may sue for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when the offender is a state employee, or assert the damages …

Punitive Damages For Constitutional Torts, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Critics complain that punitive damages often serve no good purpose. Whatever the merit of this charge as a general proposition, it is not universally valid across the range of tort suits. This article examines the issues raised by punitive damages for constitutional torts and takes issue with the general failure of commentators on punitive damages to recognize differences between constitutional tort and common law torts. I shall argue that constitutional tort is one area where punitive damage awards are essential to the effective enforcement of our rights. Constitutional tort is a special domain, in which the policy issues that bear …

Review Of "Constitutional Torts" By Sheldon H. Nahmod, Michael L. Wells, Thomas A. Eaton, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

The most interesting issues in the field of constitutional torts, involving the legal and moral bases for the government's responsibility for injuries it causes, are the most difficult ones for lawyers to explore. The question whether, as a moral or social policy matter, governments and government officials should enjoy immunities or other defenses not available to private individuals is rarely confronted directly in judicial opinions or in scholarship on constitutional torts, yet it lurks behind many of the doctrinal issues that come up in constitutional tort litigation.¹ A slight scratch on the surface of doctrines as disparate as official …

Constitutional Torts: Combining Diverse Doctrines And Practicality, Thomas A. Eaton, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

Constitutional Torts is, in part, a response to our sense that the upper level curriculum could be improved by courses that bring together areas of doctrine that are often studied in isolation. We think there is substantial value in bringing together seemingly disparate areas of doctrine that bear on a common real-world problem. Students benefit from learning how to put together concepts from different substantive areas in order to solve problems they will face in practice.

Intimate Injuries: Are There Constitutional Law Protections From Family Violence, J. Randall Patterson

Campbell Law Review

In a national upsurge of domestic violence, often occurring in the home of the victim and often committed by a member of the family, the courts across the United States have been forced to define the limits of government protection from this most intimate form of abuse. It is estimated that each year as many as sixteen million women are injured from some form of spousal violence, and in 1989 alone nearly two and one-half million reports of child abuse were filed. When can an individual rely on state or police protection from this significant private danger? This reoccurring question, …

Section 1983 And Constitutional Torts, Charles F. Abernathy

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

We have long recognized that the resurrection of section 1983 converted the fourteenth amendment from a shield into a sword by providing a civil action for vindication of constitutional rights and, to the extent that damages have gradually become the authorized remedy for section 1983 violations, we have easily come to think of such actions as constitutional torts-civil damage remedies for violations of constitutionally defined rights. There is, however, a subtler and greater reality to what has transpired, for the mere procedural vehicle of constitutional enforcement has, in retrospect, changed the substance of constitutional law itself. Section 1983 has not …

Retroactive Application Of Wilson V. Garcia: Continued Confusion To A Troubled Topic

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Past And Future Of Constitutional Torts: From Statutory Interpretation To Common Law Rules, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

The cause of action for damages to redress violations of constitutional rights is now firmly established in our law. As recently as 1960, such constitutional tort suits were rare and attracted little attention from scholars. Today, they are a major part of the work of the federal courts and the academic literature is constantly growing. This change can be partly attributed to the expansion of constitutional rights in the 1960s and 1970s, and partly to the 1961 case of Monroe v. Pape. In Monroe, the Supreme Court revived a long-neglected, ninety-year-old statute, 42 U.S.C. 1983, making it the …

Liability Of Bail Bondsmen Under Section 1983

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Derivative And Discretionary-Function Immunities Of Presidential And Congressional Aides In Constitutional Tort Actions, Kathryn D. Sowle

Articles

No abstract provided.