Knowledge

Booth v. Churner

Source 📝

31: 233:
case decided in 2001. The case concerned the extent to which a state prisoner must first utilize an administrative review process provided by the state, prior to filing a case in federal district court. The Court held that Booth still had a mechanism of administrative review, and thus his claim was
283:
of the court, which agreed with the Third Circuit in rejecting Booth's claims. The Court held that even though the prison grievance procedure did not provide for requested monetary relief, Booth was nonetheless required to exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit with respect to prison
242:
The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 requires a prisoner to exhaust "such administrative remedies as are available" before suing over prison conditions. Timothy Booth, an inmate at the State Correctional Institution at Smithfield, Pennsylvania, filed a suit in District Court, claiming that
251:
and monetary damages. At the time of Booth's suit, Pennsylvania provided an administrative grievance and appeals system, which addressed Booth's complaints but had no provision for recovery of money damages. After the prison authority denied his administrative grievance, Booth did not seek
118:
Prisoners who seek only monetary damages in suits over prison conditions still must exhaust all administrative remedies before going to court, even if monetary damages are not available under the particular administrative
284:
conditions. Justice Souter wrote for the Court, "we think that Congress has mandated exhaustion clearly enough, regardless of the relief offered through administrative procedures." Therefore, Booth's suit was premature.
512: 256:
rejected Booth's argument that the exhaustion requirement was inapplicable because the administrative process could not award him the monetary relief he sought.
428: 72: 517: 293: 252:
administrative review. Subsequently, the District Court dismissed the complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. In affirming, the
502: 389: 507: 397: 230: 35: 253: 475: 244: 216: 457: 344: 439: 150: 390:"Stacking the Deck: Futility and the Exhaustion Provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act" 432: 64: 448: 8: 406: 178: 466: 142: 134: 298: 280: 67: 371: 356: 332: 320: 174: 162: 186: 154: 496: 264: 276: 166: 484: 243:
corrections officers violated his Eighth Amendment right to be free from
260: 248: 79: 97: 105: 30: 101: 513:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court
267:
briefs at the Court, urging affirmance of the decision.
263:
his case. The attorneys general of over 30 states filed
259:
He appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which
294:Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution 494: 367: 365: 518:United States criminal procedure case law 326: 387: 362: 316: 314: 270: 495: 54:Timothy Booth, v. C.O. Churner, et al. 398:University of Pennsylvania Law Review 350: 18:2001 United States Supreme Court case 311: 217:Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 13: 381: 36:Supreme Court of the United States 14: 529: 503:United States Supreme Court cases 435:731 (2001) is available from: 417: 29: 508:2001 in United States case law 338: 254:Third Circuit Court of Appeals 1: 304: 237: 229:, 532 U.S. 731 (2001), was a 405:(3): 817–838. Archived from 245:cruel and unusual punishment 7: 287: 231:United States Supreme Court 10: 534: 485:Oyez (oral argument audio) 215: 210: 199: 194: 128: 123: 117: 112: 92: 87: 59: 49: 42: 28: 23: 388:Novikov, Eugene (2008). 100:, 1997); affirmed, 206 96:Complaint dismissed ( 78:121 S. Ct. 1819; 149 43:Argued March 20, 2001 412:on February 3, 2011. 279:wrote the unanimous 271:Opinion of the Court 247:. Booth sought both 45:Decided May 29, 2001 476:Library of Congress 179:Ruth Bader Ginsburg 151:Sandra Day O'Connor 203:Souter, joined by 139:Associate Justices 249:injunctive relief 222: 221: 135:William Rehnquist 525: 489: 483: 480: 474: 471: 465: 462: 456: 453: 447: 444: 438: 425:Booth v. Churner 413: 411: 394: 375: 369: 360: 354: 348: 342: 336: 330: 324: 318: 281:majority opinion 226:Booth v. Churner 124:Court membership 33: 32: 24:Booth v. Churner 21: 20: 533: 532: 528: 527: 526: 524: 523: 522: 493: 492: 487: 481: 478: 472: 469: 463: 460: 454: 451: 445: 442: 436: 420: 409: 392: 384: 382:Further reading 379: 378: 370: 363: 355: 351: 343: 339: 331: 327: 319: 312: 307: 290: 273: 240: 177: 175:Clarence Thomas 165: 163:Anthony Kennedy 153: 143:John P. Stevens 83: 44: 38: 19: 12: 11: 5: 531: 521: 520: 515: 510: 505: 491: 490: 458:Google Scholar 419: 418:External links 416: 415: 414: 383: 380: 377: 376: 361: 349: 337: 325: 309: 308: 306: 303: 302: 301: 296: 289: 286: 272: 269: 261:agreed to hear 239: 236: 220: 219: 213: 212: 208: 207: 201: 197: 196: 192: 191: 190: 189: 187:Stephen Breyer 155:Antonin Scalia 140: 137: 132: 126: 125: 121: 120: 115: 114: 110: 109: 94: 90: 89: 85: 84: 77: 61: 57: 56: 51: 50:Full case name 47: 46: 40: 39: 34: 26: 25: 17: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 530: 519: 516: 514: 511: 509: 506: 504: 501: 500: 498: 486: 477: 468: 459: 450: 441: 440:CourtListener 434: 430: 426: 422: 421: 408: 404: 400: 399: 391: 386: 385: 373: 368: 366: 358: 353: 346: 341: 334: 329: 322: 317: 315: 310: 300: 297: 295: 292: 291: 285: 282: 278: 268: 266: 265:amicus curiae 262: 257: 255: 250: 246: 235: 232: 228: 227: 218: 214: 209: 206: 202: 198: 193: 188: 184: 180: 176: 172: 168: 164: 160: 156: 152: 148: 144: 141: 138: 136: 133: 131:Chief Justice 130: 129: 127: 122: 116: 111: 107: 103: 99: 95: 91: 86: 81: 75: 74: 69: 66: 62: 58: 55: 52: 48: 41: 37: 27: 22: 16: 424: 407:the original 402: 396: 352: 340: 328: 277:David Souter 274: 258: 241: 225: 224: 223: 211:Laws applied 204: 195:Case opinion 182: 170: 167:David Souter 158: 146: 88:Case history 71: 53: 15: 335:at 734-736. 234:premature. 497:Categories 305:References 238:Background 205:unanimous 80:L. Ed. 2d 60:Citations 423:Text of 372:532 U.S. 357:532 U.S. 345:532 U.S. 333:532 U.S. 321:532 U.S. 288:See also 275:Justice 200:Majority 119:process. 98:M.D. Pa. 449:Findlaw 374:at 740. 359:at 741. 347:at 733. 323:at 735. 113:Holding 106:3d Cir. 488:  482:  479:  473:  470:  467:Justia 464:  461:  455:  452:  446:  443:  437:  299:Appeal 185: 183:· 181:  173: 171:· 169:  161: 159:· 157:  149: 147:· 145:  431: 410:(PDF) 393:(PDF) 108:2000) 104:289 ( 93:Prior 433:U.S. 102:F.3d 73:more 65:U.S. 63:532 429:532 403:156 82:958 68:731 499:: 427:, 401:. 395:. 364:^ 313:^ 76:) 70:(

Index

Supreme Court of the United States
U.S.
731
more
L. Ed. 2d
M.D. Pa.
F.3d
3d Cir.
William Rehnquist
John P. Stevens
Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy
David Souter
Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer
Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995
United States Supreme Court
cruel and unusual punishment
injunctive relief
Third Circuit Court of Appeals
agreed to hear
amicus curiae
David Souter
majority opinion
Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Appeal

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.